hi, someone needs to turn this into one big documentary.. filipino people all over the world need to know this. i did not learn anything in history class...
your subliminal attempt at associating the fake issue of Code of Kalantiaw with the Tallano claim is deceiving. Sputnik didn't mention anything at all about the code, you did.
First off, there was never a real Maharlika Kingdom. It's a propaganda to validly unite the entire modern-day Philippines spread by the Marcos which was then taken advantage of some other ultra Filipinist individuals whom are delusional towards a homogeneous nation-state. European accounts from the mid to late 16th century upon contact with inhabitants accounted for civilized peoples indeed, but they were never under a unified politico-ethnic sphere. See this legitimate text for itself. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30253/30253.txt
I'd rather get real facts from a credible historical account than some random scribd document. I am Visayan and my family nor my ancestors were never a subject of some anonymous Tagalog family.
it's curious to observe, other than some narrow, convenient attempt to underrate the existence of Maharlika and total unquestioning submission to any data from foreigners with their own agenda than over indigenous sources rooted in defining this nation, that you seem to possess divisive regionalistic views; based on the article it portrayed Lapulapu as brother of Solaiman that seemed to show your antagonisism on the historical hero that you tend to imply as from "Tagalog family." Such divisive posturing is not beneficial in light of the diversity, cosmopolitan culture that otherwise define and harmonize this country.
Divisiveness is the usual accusation of the disciples of the ever-loved Tagalog empire. In the first place, was there ever any form of unity other than an artificial political jurisdiction out of legal writing?
Historical accounts using the Aginid, an important Cebuano epic, points out that Sri Lapu-Lapu was from Borneo, an orang laut (man of the sea). How he became Rajah (or should I say Sultan) Sulayman's brother is hazy. He was said to have converted to Islam after he was accepted by Hindu-Buddhist Visayans primarily by the Cebuanos under the rule of Sri Bantug. It should also be noted that the etymology of Sugbo is rather not to wade in water, but scorched earth which was a defensive technique practiced by the Visayans against the Muslim pirates which Lapu-Lapu became prior to the arrival of Magellan.
You can see more here: http://bit.ly/RpBa9Z and here: http://bit.ly/O0aAkl
No Tagalog or Visayan folklore has given the slightest hint about this dubious family that ruled over the entire archipelago which in the beginning was inhabited by independently functioning nation-states with varied religious affiliations. Until no substantial proof other than unproven legal documents say that the then-hypothesized "Philippines" was indeed under a monarchy, I shall be considering this as a mere urban legend.
I see you're from Davao. How come you have more allegiance towards these pestering nationalists? Unless you're a migrant or a Tagalog?
For the mean time, enjoy contributing to the entire system that oppresses non-Tagalogs and those who shun the "national identity."
See? Typical simplistic Filipino mindset. Everyone's long been brainwashed by an ethnocentric "nationalistic" propaganda that's killing all the other identities in this country.
In the first place, was there any rationale for this country to be one country? Have you ever asked what was the history of other parts of the "Philippines" while these Katipuneros from Malolos Republic kept on losing during the revolution? 8 provinces. Wow. Surely, you can say they began the revolution, but did they win a single theater? No. Were there clarified details on the inclusion of the entire Philippines in the Treaty of Paris? No.
Nationalists want to maintain the oppressive status quo that is the stronger divisive system killing our languages calling them dialects, killing our culture and concealing our histories replacing with everything that happened in Luzon.
This ain't regionalism. This is nationalism. Philippines: one nation? We're composed of several nations (Bikol, Ilokano, Visayan, Tagalog, Lumad, Moro, Ibanag, Cordilleran, etc). We're an artificial state. Don't act as if you're the ones being victimized by "evil regionalist secessionists." You're the ones subscribing to a corrupt political paradigm.
Other than struggling to fight some nagging sense of inferiority to some group, in this case the "evil' Tagalogs, you may have some points worth considering but again there seems one that may be be brought against.
Yours seem to be portraying Lapulapu as a villain. You will have to contend with those who will vehemently oppose your view.
Surely it is a noble deed to be proud of one's place or region and should be encouraged, but such ridiculous regionalistic divisiveness is the one that's corruptive that turned out eating one's own malicious words. I suggest you better go and explore other places especially those with highly diverse and cosmopiltan populations like Davao and Puerto Princesa City, places that are truly melting pots in the country, this time with broader mindset, and sense far larger sense of harmony amid the diversity of a more broadminded populace, unless some myopic regionalistic arrogance bordering on insecurity muddle that harmony.
Frankly speaking, those who do not have some sense of inferiority with Tagalogs cannot really relate with those extremely regionalistic and divisive viewpoints. I suggest you continue to be proud of your great and historical place, which is indeed deserving of, rather than trying to put down fellow Tagalogs to uplift your agenda at their expense.
"Frankly speaking, those who do not have some sense of inferiority with Tagalogs cannot really relate with those extremely regionalistic and divisive viewpoints."
^ Sure, it's a must that we should not feel a percent of inferiority towards Tagalogs. We are all, in fact, equal in terms of identity and culture as all human beings, Filipino citizen or not.
But, of course, this isn't the reality. I acknowledge that you know where I am coming from. I also hope you have an idea about this: http://kamaru.blogspot.no/2008/01/more-on-tagalogs-discrimination-of.html
The whole myth of Maharlika and these Tallanos are being used as an indirect means to homogenize the entire country. Cynical it may sound, but the concept of a single prehispanic government subscribes that we communicating under the guise of one linguistic heritage, thus a monolithic national identity like that of the Koreans or Japanese--a very attenuated means to validate the eradication of other languages and cultures. It doesn't happen in a day or years, but it manifests in a generation or so.
People can choose whether they can dispose of their original identity and language or not, but a (politico-cultural) system that inherently uses ridicule and misinformation as an incentive for them to throw it away, is unethical and against human rights.
I know that much of Mindanao and Palawan are ethnically diverse. It was magnified by the works beginning from Magsaysay's government in the 50's to solidify indigenous lowland Christians' claim of the entire present-day territories under Philippine sovereignty from Lumads and Moros. That's why I was asking whether you're a Tagalog from a Davaoeño family or a Tagalog immigrant.
The usual argument among pro-Filipinism nationalists is the disease of regionalism--that these kinds of people from the peripheries of the center (apparently has jurisdiction over much of Katagalugan) are subverts and contribute to the further decline of Philippine society. From the lens of an aspirant for a homogeneous society, the Philippines with its ethnic diversity can never be cyrstalized no matter how you rationalize because such structure cannot form unless we all become culturally Tagalog or whatsoever consciousness the center would like to impose. But if one would like to maintain the strength in numbers like what we have now under one state, YET promotes equality, harmony, respect and autonomy among ethnicities, we would not only achieve a cultural crystalization of each identities, we could also achieve better heights as different peoples under one aspiration as A state (e.g. Switzerland, Belgium, Singapore to a lesser extent). One part of that is accepting the fact that such myth being discussed is instead more disruptive to our collective awareness.
People from my perspective have long tried to pacify and maintain the idea of tolerance, but the current we are against at are the ones who initiate this 'pulling-down' antic from scathing stereotypes in real life or online up to wider reaches such as educational policies and media.
One calls Visayan a filthy laborer or a Kapampangan a dog race, and he is applauded for his 'comedy.' One calls Tagalogs names, and he is an enemy of the people. Criticize 'province people,' and be people agree. Criticize the center, and be admonished. Disgusting double standards
Don't worry. It's not usually the Tagalogs who are blamed. It's kind of funny that the non-Tagalogs themselves are the ones who support Filipinism (slash, pan-Tagalogism) by thinking their parents' hometowns are miserable economic backwaters or their relatives' language is ridiculous. Guess the Filipinism movement is one of the few things we can say the government was successful to do. Propaganda is really powerful. You should contribute to this brilliant work. Very progressive
13 comments:
hi, someone needs to turn this into one big documentary.. filipino people all over the world need to know this. i did not learn anything in history class...
and there's more, our ancestors' legacy may have held among the most ancient in Humanity's history.
@sputnik
Explains a lot why you dont know anything about this.
Code of Kalantiaw was fake.
Tadeon-Tallano clan claims that they own the whole Philippines.
Have fun using google.
your subliminal attempt at associating the fake issue of Code of Kalantiaw with the Tallano claim is deceiving. Sputnik didn't mention anything at all about the code, you did.
First off, there was never a real Maharlika Kingdom. It's a propaganda to validly unite the entire modern-day Philippines spread by the Marcos which was then taken advantage of some other ultra Filipinist individuals whom are delusional towards a homogeneous nation-state. European accounts from the mid to late 16th century upon contact with inhabitants accounted for civilized peoples indeed, but they were never under a unified politico-ethnic sphere. See this legitimate text for itself. http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30253/30253.txt
I'd rather get real facts from a credible historical account than some random scribd document. I am Visayan and my family nor my ancestors were never a subject of some anonymous Tagalog family.
it's curious to observe, other than some narrow, convenient attempt to underrate the existence of Maharlika and total unquestioning submission to any data from foreigners with their own agenda than over indigenous sources rooted in defining this nation, that you seem to possess divisive regionalistic views; based on the article it portrayed Lapulapu as brother of Solaiman that seemed to show your antagonisism on the historical hero that you tend to imply as from "Tagalog family." Such divisive posturing is not beneficial in light of the diversity, cosmopolitan culture that otherwise define and harmonize this country.
@Ric Vil Hori
Divisiveness is the usual accusation of the disciples of the ever-loved Tagalog empire. In the first place, was there ever any form of unity other than an artificial political jurisdiction out of legal writing?
Historical accounts using the Aginid, an important Cebuano epic, points out that Sri Lapu-Lapu was from Borneo, an orang laut (man of the sea). How he became Rajah (or should I say Sultan) Sulayman's brother is hazy. He was said to have converted to Islam after he was accepted by Hindu-Buddhist Visayans primarily by the Cebuanos under the rule of Sri Bantug. It should also be noted that the etymology of Sugbo is rather not to wade in water, but scorched earth which was a defensive technique practiced by the Visayans against the Muslim pirates which Lapu-Lapu became prior to the arrival of Magellan.
You can see more here:
http://bit.ly/RpBa9Z
and here:
http://bit.ly/O0aAkl
No Tagalog or Visayan folklore has given the slightest hint about this dubious family that ruled over the entire archipelago which in the beginning was inhabited by independently functioning nation-states with varied religious affiliations. Until no substantial proof other than unproven legal documents say that the then-hypothesized "Philippines" was indeed under a monarchy, I shall be considering this as a mere urban legend.
I see you're from Davao. How come you have more allegiance towards these pestering nationalists? Unless you're a migrant or a Tagalog?
For the mean time, enjoy contributing to the entire system that oppresses non-Tagalogs and those who shun the "national identity."
LOL what silly regionalistic extremism, this highly diverse country definitely does not need one haha
See? Typical simplistic Filipino mindset. Everyone's long been brainwashed by an ethnocentric "nationalistic" propaganda that's killing all the other identities in this country.
In the first place, was there any rationale for this country to be one country? Have you ever asked what was the history of other parts of the "Philippines" while these Katipuneros from Malolos Republic kept on losing during the revolution? 8 provinces. Wow. Surely, you can say they began the revolution, but did they win a single theater? No. Were there clarified details on the inclusion of the entire Philippines in the Treaty of Paris? No.
Nationalists want to maintain the oppressive status quo that is the stronger divisive system killing our languages calling them dialects, killing our culture and concealing our histories replacing with everything that happened in Luzon.
This ain't regionalism. This is nationalism. Philippines: one nation? We're composed of several nations (Bikol, Ilokano, Visayan, Tagalog, Lumad, Moro, Ibanag, Cordilleran, etc). We're an artificial state. Don't act as if you're the ones being victimized by "evil regionalist secessionists." You're the ones subscribing to a corrupt political paradigm.
Other than struggling to fight some nagging sense of inferiority to some group, in this case the "evil' Tagalogs, you may have some points worth considering but again there seems one that may be be brought against.
Yours seem to be portraying Lapulapu as a villain. You will have to contend with those who will vehemently oppose your view.
Surely it is a noble deed to be proud of one's place or region and should be encouraged, but such ridiculous regionalistic divisiveness is the one that's corruptive that turned out eating one's own malicious words. I suggest you better go and explore other places especially those with highly diverse and cosmopiltan populations like Davao and Puerto Princesa City, places that are truly melting pots in the country, this time with broader mindset, and sense far larger sense of harmony amid the diversity of a more broadminded populace, unless some myopic regionalistic arrogance bordering on insecurity muddle that harmony.
Frankly speaking, those who do not have some sense of inferiority with Tagalogs cannot really relate with those extremely regionalistic and divisive viewpoints. I suggest you continue to be proud of your great and historical place, which is indeed deserving of, rather than trying to put down fellow Tagalogs to uplift your agenda at their expense.
"Frankly speaking, those who do not have some sense of inferiority with Tagalogs cannot really relate with those extremely regionalistic and divisive viewpoints."
^ Sure, it's a must that we should not feel a percent of inferiority towards Tagalogs. We are all, in fact, equal in terms of identity and culture as all human beings, Filipino citizen or not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbnNAJ7FQz0&feature=player_embedded
But, of course, this isn't the reality. I acknowledge that you know where I am coming from. I also hope you have an idea about this: http://kamaru.blogspot.no/2008/01/more-on-tagalogs-discrimination-of.html
The whole myth of Maharlika and these Tallanos are being used as an indirect means to homogenize the entire country. Cynical it may sound, but the concept of a single prehispanic government subscribes that we communicating under the guise of one linguistic heritage, thus a monolithic national identity like that of the Koreans or Japanese--a very attenuated means to validate the eradication of other languages and cultures. It doesn't happen in a day or years, but it manifests in a generation or so.
People can choose whether they can dispose of their original identity and language or not, but a (politico-cultural) system that inherently uses ridicule and misinformation as an incentive for them to throw it away, is unethical and against human rights.
I know that much of Mindanao and Palawan are ethnically diverse. It was magnified by the works beginning from Magsaysay's government in the 50's to solidify indigenous lowland Christians' claim of the entire present-day territories under Philippine sovereignty from Lumads and Moros. That's why I was asking whether you're a Tagalog from a Davaoeño family or a Tagalog immigrant.
The usual argument among pro-Filipinism nationalists is the disease of regionalism--that these kinds of people from the peripheries of the center (apparently has jurisdiction over much of Katagalugan) are subverts and contribute to the further decline of Philippine society. From the lens of an aspirant for a homogeneous society, the Philippines with its ethnic diversity can never be cyrstalized no matter how you rationalize because such structure cannot form unless we all become culturally Tagalog or whatsoever consciousness the center would like to impose. But if one would like to maintain the strength in numbers like what we have now under one state, YET promotes equality, harmony, respect and autonomy among ethnicities, we would not only achieve a cultural crystalization of each identities, we could also achieve better heights as different peoples under one aspiration as A state (e.g. Switzerland, Belgium, Singapore to a lesser extent). One part of that is accepting the fact that such myth being discussed is instead more disruptive to our collective awareness.
People from my perspective have long tried to pacify and maintain the idea of tolerance, but the current we are against at are the ones who initiate this 'pulling-down' antic from scathing stereotypes in real life or online up to wider reaches such as educational policies and media.
One calls Visayan a filthy laborer or a Kapampangan a dog race, and he is applauded for his 'comedy.' One calls Tagalogs names, and he is an enemy of the people. Criticize 'province people,' and be people agree. Criticize the center, and be admonished. Disgusting double standards
Don't worry. It's not usually the Tagalogs who are blamed. It's kind of funny that the non-Tagalogs themselves are the ones who support Filipinism (slash, pan-Tagalogism) by thinking their parents' hometowns are miserable economic backwaters or their relatives' language is ridiculous. Guess the Filipinism movement is one of the few things we can say the government was successful to do. Propaganda is really powerful. You should contribute to this brilliant work. Very progressive
Nation is not equivalent to state, by the way. Melding the two has been a delusion from Jacobinist French republic
what is your email ad sir ric vil hori
i have something to send
Post a Comment