PHILOSOPHIES OF HISTORY

INTRODUCTION

The Philosophy of History is a concept that helps us to look at the past events and reflect upon it with a specific perspective that will provide us with the insights that we need to learn, so we can move forward with the proper orientation of actions and decisions that we must take into consideration to initiate social transformation and attain sustainable development that we aim to fulfill and exemplify for the succeeding generations to come. Philosophy of history offers us the privilege to learn from the relevant events of history and become more aware of our identity as a people by analyzing and understanding the essential factors and forces that contribute to the progress of our existence in the present moment. Hence, as educators of history, it is our responsibility to guide our people, especially the next generation, with the perspective that they need in order to take the path of enlightenment. This is the essence of learning the Philosophy of History. It drives and leads us to the enlightening moments that may transform us as a people and aim for the betterment of our society and culture.

In this evaluation paper, I will discuss the concepts of structuralism, deconstructionism, and postmodernism. Furthermore, I will use the lens of each philosophy to examine and understand the details of certain events in the Philippine History and World History, where the United States played a crucial role and became involved in building the narratives of relevant circumstances of people in the past.

The discussion of this paper aims to awaken the Filipino people from the point of view that always looks to the American culture with excessive reverence to the point that we perceive ourselves with inferiority. It seeks to reorient the Filipino people with the proper perspective to understand their history. This is the reason I choose the above-mentioned philosophies. They provide us with unconventional wisdom and insight that provoke the people to reconstruct their way of looking things and build a perspective that can give them the substantive redemption that they need in their situation.

DISCUSSION

Philosophies of History

Structuralism proposes that everything is constructed. All knowledge, ideas, activities, and even human thoughts are grounded on the structure firmly established within a society. According to the proponents of this philosophy, we behave based on a structure that determines the position and role of each element or actor that interacts and interrelates with each other as part of a whole (Philosophy Basics). Hence, it is the structure that dictates the meaning in everything that we think and operate (Philosophy Basics). The main question is, “who is responsible for establishing the structure?”

In Postmodernism, the group of people responsible for establishing the structure within a society is called the POWER MATRIX. The Power Matrix are those who hold the power in the society such as the government, elite, victors of the war, and even mass media. Based on the core idea of Postmodernism, POWER IS KNOWLEDGE. It means that those people who have the POWER are those who have control over the vessel of KNOWLEDGE that should be considered by the people as the TRUTH that they must believe in. Having said that, postmodernists claim that there is no absolute truth. Everything is relative and contextual. The truth is based on the context and culture set by the Power Matrix of a particular society. Hence, the Power Matrix dictate the kind of structure that must be established in order to impose the value or knowledge that they want to inculcate to the people of a society.

This is the reason Deconstructionism is very essential. Deconstructionism circles around the idea of dismantling a set of core beliefs, cultures, and traditions built upon the structure or system of a society. In an article entitled “Deconstruction the end of writing: ‘Everything is a text, there is nothing outside context’,” Gavin P. Hendricks indicated that “Deconstruction seeks out those points or cracks in the system, where it disguises the fact of its incompleteness, its failure to cohere as a self-contained whole. (2016)” In simple words, since the structure or system is a product of biased construction, Deconstruction highlights the prejudices within it and uncovers the defectiveness of it. After that, it reconstructs with the new system that fixes and resolves those points of prejudices and defectiveness. In history, deconstructionism deconstructs the details of an event and reconstructs the narrative of it by looking at the lens of the other narration or perspective of the story.

Analyzing the Role of United States in History through the lens of Structuralism, Postmodernism, and Deconstructionism

I grew up in an educational system where the Textbooks for the Philippine History and the teachers who taught it depicted the United States as a Great Savior of the Philippines during the Japanese occupation in the World War II. I received a kind of narrative that discussed World War II as a simple battle between good and evil. However, the story about it is not that simple. There are various narratives that people should dig deeper to understand the whole picture of it, but this is not the case in the context of the basic education in the Philippines. As a matter of fact, Philippine History is full of twisted stories that have not been straightened out that affected the narration of it in the Basic Education. We could not blame the teachers and the writers of Philippine History textbooks because they were just also victims and products of the Educational Structures that have been long-established in the country. Most Filipinos would graduate from the Basic Education with an understanding that Americans have provided us with a civilized education and culture. This is a form of structuralism. Our mindset had been structured in a way that we were not able to resist it because that was the way that we have been taught. Fortunately, Professor F. Landa Jocano, a Filipino Anthropologist, could give us an enlightenment regarding that issue.

In his book, Filipino Prehistory: Rediscovering Precolonial Heritage, Jocano (2001) said that “Through education and training, reinforced by an aggressive media, American thoughts, values, and practices were introduced as standards of excellence. ” This is a very important idea to point out. This statement supports the premise that the Americans utilized the concept of Structuralism. Americans used an Educational Structure to impose ideas, knowledge, and culture that heavily influenced and dictated the way of thinking and behaving of the Filipino people. It was a very good tactic to brainwash a young generation of Filipinos who did not have a formal education to support and strengthen their grip towards their traditional culture and identity as natives of the Philippines. Hence, when they underwent through American education and training, it was very easy for them to embrace it without any form of resistance.

Based on neuroscience, the best period to create habits and form the identity of a person is between 0-7 years old. During this period, children tend to absorb all information, ideas, and experiences that they observe. This was the reason the American teachers included these Popular Classroom songs below as part of their learning session with the Filipino children:

1. “planting rice is never fun” 2. “clean little hands are good to see” 3. “I was poorly born on top of the mountains (Jocano, 2001)”

These might be simple songs, but if you would strictly analyze it, then you would observe that there was a hidden agenda behind it. It was purposely used to degrade the context of those Filipinos living in the agricultural areas of the Philippines and create an image in the mind of the children that they should not pursue that kind of living and aspire to experience an American way of life, which was the standard of excellence in the kind of education that they implemented for the Filipinos.

Upon overcoming the forces of Emilio Aguinaldo, the Americans absolutely gained the power over certain areas in the Philippines. Hence, during American occupation, they could be considered as the Power Matrix of the Filipino society. They were the ones controlling the knowledge that the Filipino masses accepted and believed to be the truth. Having said that, Americans set a structure where they could influence and determine the behavior of ordinary Filipinos. In a sense, this is the concept of Postmodernism. Americans might not totally understand the concept of Postmodernism during that time, but their actions exemplified the role of a Power Matrix in the philosophy of Postmodernism; and as a matter of fact, they continued to play the role of being the Power Matrix up until they won the cold war and at the latter part of the 20th century.

Since the United States won the World War II against the Axis Power and the Cold War against the Soviet Union, Americans were able to establish a structure of knowledge that highlighted them as the Hero of the International Community. This image of the United States is prevalent in the Philippine History textbooks that I mentioned earlier. Hence, the Americans were able to hide some of the crimes that they have committed from the perspective of many Filipinos. For example, in the book The Untold History of the United States, Stone and Kuznick (2012) indicated the number of Filipinos who died because of the Philippine-American war. According to them, there were “…-perhaps 20,000 guerillas and at least 200,000 civilians, many from cholera.” who died. In addition to that, we also have to mention the cases of arson, sexual abuse against women, water boarding, and mass murder against the Indigenous Filipino People. I would bet that most of the ordinary Filipinos would not have an idea about it if not for the expose of information of President Rodrigo Duterte in the mainstream media. Should we blame the Filipino masses for not being able to know this information? I do not think so. If we will use the perspective of Structuralism, then we can reaffirm that they are just a product of a Structure established to form them with a mindset that operates with that kind of thinking.

Now let us look at the International Level. Stone and Kuznick (2012) presented on their book an excerpt of a statement from the political manifesto of Adolf Hitler entitled Mein Kampf. In that excerpt, Hitler said that, “I have studied with great interest the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock (Stone and Kuznick, 2012).” So, what is the meaning of that? Hitler was directly saying that the model that he used for the systematic killing of the Jews were the actions implemented by the Americans. According to Stone and Kuznick (2012), “The Germans also drew inspiration from the ill-fated US flirtation with eugenics and racial hygiene in the 1920s and 1930s.”

Stone and Kuznick (2012) further explained that there were also records of American businessmen and companies who became involved in supporting the Germans with resources. They also mentioned the name of the famous Henry Ford who supplied the Germans with trucks and helped them in disseminating the hateful ideologies.

It only means that the United States was a double agent country during the World War II period. This information provided us with a glimpse of the so-called hidden narratives that were not usually discussed or emphasized in the mainstream media and popular culture. The problem is mainstream media and popular culture are the usual major source of information of the ordinary people like the Filipinos. This is the reason why Filipinos would trust the Americans more than the Chinese people. In their perspective that is heavily influenced by the American ideals, the United States is still the hero that would save the Filipino people just like the situation during World War II.

All the above information that have been discussed earlier would help us to deconstruct our perspective of the United States and reconstruct the narratives of history where the Americans have been perceived as Glorious Heroes. F. Landa Jocano, Oliver Stone, and Peter Kuznick could be considered as the initiators of deconstructing and reconstructing the narratives of the structured history that the American hegemon have established. They provided us with a different way of looking at the past events where the United States was considered as a Hero of the story.

Well, to be honest, we are still in the process of restructuring the storyline of our history, especially in the Philippines. The good thing is we can now use other avenues to reach out and reconstruct the mindset of the Filipino masses. Take for instance the Heneral Luna film. It provided us with a fresh perspective of what the Americans did against us. In the film, it was very clear that the Americans befriended us, betrayed us, and subjugated us. Hence, it is now the start of deconstructing and reconstructing the mindset of the Filipinos regarding their views about the United States.

CONCLUSION

History is the study of the past so that we can face the challenges and problems of the present that will help us to move forward in sustaining the movement toward the future. This is my personal definition of history. I thought it was a good definition. However, philosophy of history helps me to realize that studying past events will not matter if we use a mindset bound by biased structures or perspective. Philosophies like Structuralism, Postmodernism, and Deconstructionism can help us to further examine and understand the behavior of a particular actor or element in the history. We cannot just rely on the surface information that can be easily observed within the system or structure. As educators and students of History, it is always important for us to dig deeper on the narrative and issue of the event and use various perspectives or philosophies to verify the rationale behind it. We need to continually reconstruct our perspective in understanding the past events in history, so we can have a better reflection of our present situation and create a better future for us and for the succeeding generations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

- Hendricks, G. (2016, October 20). Deconstruction the end of writing: ‘Everything is a text, there is nothing outside context’. Verbum et Ecclesia. Available at: http://www.scielo.org.za/pdf/vee/v37n1/50.pdf

- Jocano, F. (2001). Filipino Prehistory: Rediscovering Precolonial Heritage. PUNLAD Research House, Inc.

- Philosophybasics. Structuralism. Philosophybasics. Available at: https://www.philosophybasics.com/movements_structuralism.html

- Stone O. & Kuznick P. (2012). The Untold History of the United States. Gallery Books