The Political Self

The Filipino Citizen

Seeking the Filipino Identity

A complete and comprehensive idea of a Filipino identity is not easy to identify because
of the rich culture each set and subset of people living within the Philippines have. If we ask,
what is a cultural identity of a certain group of people, say Ilocos or Mangyans, then there would
be a readily available answer for that. But to ask who is a Filipino, as a national identity -- that
takes a lot of digging of the past.
History shown us how Filipino identity has evolved from the pre-colonial period, to the
colonial period and the present, We were shaped by the wars and powers that usurped our land,
that bowing down to their definition of who we are seems to be recourse. In the process of this
acceptance, we have forgotten who we are.
The current movement towards globalization is also threatening that thin and vulnerable
definition that we have come up with, our resilience and adaptability made us embrace other
people's culture, shoving aside our tradition, values and even somewhat our identity. This is also
very much pronounced as well in our search for our political self.
The independence and the constitution 'given' to us declared that we are Filipino citizen.
But what exactly does that mean? What does it mean to be a Filipino citizen?
According to the 1987 Philippine Constitution, Art. 4, Sec. 1, these are the citizens of the
Philippines:
Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the adoption of this Constitution;
1) Those whose fathers or mothers are citizens of the Philippines;
2) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship
upon reaching the age of majority; and
3) Those who are naturalized in accordance to law.
Such identification as enshrined in the constitution is very helpful but the challenge is
how far up to what extent do we feel this citizenship? When I say I am a Filipino citizen, does it
necessarily translate to I have a Filipino nationality? Is there a sense of nationalism that we can
truly and proudly say, I am a Filipino and Philippines is my homeland?
Unfortunately, such technical definition might not be translated to our beliefs and
traditions, especially when we go deep to the marginalized Filipinos. So the quest continues. Just
who are we as people? What are the roles we are supposed to play?

Democracy – From Theirs to Ours

The inception of democracy was derived from the colonizer's (specifically the
Americans) traditions and continued by the elite (who took over from where the proletariats
started when the Spaniards were defeated). This ideology was handed down to us by the
Americans and we have been taught to pattern ourselves according to their brand of government.
The idea of democracy did not emerge from our identity but it was forced on us and
rigidly shaped us and our identity according to the definition given by our colonizers, most
especially US. This is not really a good start because we have a kind of political system that did
not grow from the political will of the ordinary people. A true democracy is a rule coming from
the people, but if the people do not understand it -- how can they say that they are the ones who
rule? The problem lies now in the lack of identity between the democratic practice and the
beliefs and practices of the Filipinos. Later, in the discussion of political culture, we will see this
more clearly.
Therefore, there is a need to re-write our definition of democracy. It has to be a definition
that will tell us this is OUR government, written by the sweat of its people and guarded by their
hearts.
At present, we have been making a movement towards a grass-root concept of
democracy. But this will only be possible if the masses of poor people and uneducated will find
their voice. This struggle for the building of Filipino nation is a continuous process that keeps
changing the parameters of the challenges every time the society moves from one era to another,
decade after decade. A different problem is faced as times changed and with every response, that
identity keeps shifting as well. For me to say that individuals, every citizen, should be a part of
nation building -- I mean hare a concerted effort of voices coming together in unison.
Currently, I can say that we are at a place in history where changes occurring in the
society has given the ordinary Filipino a venue for an expression of their sentiments. I am talking
here of social media as a powerful stage of expression. According to a study conducted in 2015,
we are very highly Social nation. This is the new platform for Filipinos that we can use towards a
sincere path to positive change.

Perception of a Filipino's Role in a Democratic Setting

What we face today is a people who embrace the ideology of democracy. The problem
lies in how we can translate this idea into everyday practice so that people can fully appreciate it.
Art. 2, Sec. 5 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states:
"The maintenance of the peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and the
promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the
blessings of democracy."
According to this article, three things should be provided by the government before we
can enjoy democracy (1) maintenance of peace and order, (2) protection of life, liberty and
property, and (3) promotion of general welfare. We demand, as a citizen enjoying the full rights
provided by the constitution, that we must have all these three. Otherwise, we may not be able to
fulfill our role as a citizen in a democratic setting. If we cannot have these three, then we will not
be able to reach our full potential and make a clear definition of our political self. The absence of
those three may create the lack of empathy towards nationhood.
A major part of such a fulfillment is a general consensus coming from Filipinos that first,
we should be able to participate and be heard in the political process. our needs and wants should
be heard, if possible through our individual voices or through our chosen representatives. the
challenge as is the case in every nation where freedom of speech is present, would be in
consolidating these voices and opinions into one range of acceptable interpretation.
Secondly, there must be a consistency in the principles and policies declared in the
constitution and in how Filipinos live their lives. It is not enough that we be called Filipinos, but
we should understand and translate into action what that really means. Thus if we say, we have a
democracy, then we should also say that there is peace and order, my life, liberty and property
are protected and that general welfare is promoted. I think that is the essence of Art. 2, Sec. 5.
Indeed as Pzeworski (1991) points out the presence of democratic institutions is no guarantee
that citizens are able to exercise their rights and obligations.
But before we can claim our rights, most Filipinos are also aware that there are duties to
be performed as well. As to what kind of duties they are, there are variations of answers.
According to a study done in 1994, entitled Contemporary Philippine Value, there are general
agreements on certain situations like, standing when the national anthem is being played,
awareness of community affairs and payment of taxes. However, diversity also manifested itself
in certain situations like, family needs versus those of societal needs and how public property
should be treated.
According to Diokno (1997), though this research happened 3 years earlier, the
Democracy Agenda Project, the general agreement regarding the definition of democracy
was democracy is a process, fundamentally a way of life, a means of relating with other
individuals, groups and the state, and a collective process of decision-making in order to attain
political liberty, social justice and equity.
From this, we can see that participative democracy was the preferred choice of
democracy over the elite democracy. It entails a more active role in the political decision
making. An example of this would be participation during elections. According to Zialcita
(1997), effective citizenship is one where people know that they can depend on themselves to
help the state because they are productive and can build things, "people who come up with ideas
and resources; people who are bold; people who are accountable."
But such participation will not be successful if we keep a 'me/us family only' attitude. In
the same conference, it was found out that one of the missing ingredients in our democratic
practice is the lack of concern towards the common good. We will see this in their definition of
the community.
In a democratic setting -- the community should always include the nation, however,
there are many instances when loyalty is given more to the local community. In fact it's not even
the local community that is taken into account but its loyalty to a very limited immediate
community which is composed of the family. It is also worth noting that when this conclusion
was compared to the indigenous practice of democracy, the result shows that indigenous people
have a strong sense of community and thus, prioritize common good over individual rights.
Another finding made during the project was the consensus regarding redistributive
democracy. There is a clamor to have a better redistribution of resources and capabilities,
particularly land, income and wealth. According to a statistics research done in 2014, seven out
of ten farmers are not landowners. though this has been a problem since during the time of the
Spaniards, we can see that the problem still persists. Laws on land refords have been enacted but
the process of land distribution has been slow. The las was passed 27 years ago hoping to
balance the status and to answer the demands of social justice.
There is a belief that failure to redistribute these would be a great hindrance in the true
exercise of democracy. As long as the presence of the wide economic gap between people in one
republic is present, then the practice of democracy will be difficult and rights would be more
prone to abuse by those who have so much more in terms of the economic value.

Philippine Political Culture – A Problem of Variation

In assessing the Philippine political culture, it is necessary for us to understand the
cultural background of the citizens and when I say citizens, this would include the majority and
the countless, nameless minority out these. This is important because as has been discussed
earlier, one of the problems is the way we prioritize the immediate community we are in -- in this
case the family. Thus, if the citizens feel removed from the bigger community to which they
belong, then we cannot expect much nationalism form them.
There are culturally two categories of communities:
1. Minority
They are culturally, ethnically, or racially distinct group that coexists with but is
subordinate to a more dominant group. in the figure above, we can see that they represent 25.3%
of the whole population. Emphasis here is given on the subordinate. They are usually
marginalized and perceived themselves (whether rightly or wrongly) as unrecognized by the
national government. Some examples such as groups of Ifugao of Kala, Bukidnon of Iloilo, and
Muslims.
One of the biggest problems that has to be dealt with concerning them would be the
feeling of alienation since the integration to the general society has not been made. Let me show
you a typical problem for them that a person coming from a majority group will not encounter.
Supposing that they would decide to have an education. They will be educated with the
foundation of a Manila-based background, science, technology, and lifestyle. The books that will
be handed down to them will not talk about their ethnicity, nor the manner by which they live
their lives. Also, the medium will not be in their language but it will be either English or
Filipino. They are studying a strange lifestyle using a strange language.
This might account for the low literacy rate that was given to them (specially the
Ifugaos). They were being assessed based on a different set of learning that has been given to
them. The disparity and lack of recognition of their cultural and traditional practices also
somehow creates a sense that they are inferior. this sentiment is a throwback of how the
colonizers treated the Filipinos. Thus, there won't be much political participation from them in
the national level because, the same way that education has not understood them -- so Philippine
politics also would be alien to them.
There is no connection at the national level, and if this is the case, they would hardly feel
that they are the "others" and can't call Philippines theirs. Thus, a description of the national
character is usually a description of the majority. We will see that these characters usually do not
apply to the members of the minority.
2. Majority
This would often be characterized by Tagalog/English speakers and with
Christianity/Catholicism as the basis of faith. How does faith factor in the political culture? The
relationship becomes pronounced during the election where some religious sectors would go for
block voting. However, the extent of such an influence of the church is not easily demonstrated
as some of the endorsed candidates have not won. Also, in passing of a law, it can also be seen
that those bills considered to be controversial are those that primarily go against the practices of
the dominant church-revolution. One major direct political participation was during the first
EDSA revolution. We can see how the church can still have a strong influence on the people.
 One thing that characterizes this participation is the emotional response. Majority would
be prompted by emotion rather than an intellectual speculation. This goes trues with regard to
people who will be voted into power. 2 reasons were cited by Doronilla (1997) for this: (1)
limited venues for political participation so that when an opportunity presents itself in which
people can find a commonality of interest, the response is spontaneous; and (2) a deeper or less
superficial understanding of the issues owing to the weakness of schools or mass media which
are mainly in English, and the lack or absence of systematic popular education of the public on
issues of common interest.

Movement Towards the Common Good. A Path to a Defined Political Self

As mentioned earlier, the greater demand from the citizens, also means that they are
aware that this is a partnership which also demands the performance of duties and obligations
from the side of the citizens. Some duties have already been mentioned above. But the most
problematic area recognized was the lack of empathy towards others. There is an idea that for as
long as one is happy and not hurting others, then they are still good citizens.
However, this also results in the lack of community conscience where one has to deeply
care for the community -- and not just the family. This is a bit surprising, considering the
traditionally-held honored values like pakikisama, bayanihan, etc. This will not help the cause of
democracy since as a political animal, we do necessarily live in a community and feed off on
each other's rights and duties. Thus, there is an urgent need to create a national identity to which
everybody can claim right and feel the need to protect that right for the good of the nation-
community.
As a citizen, there should be a sense of belonging and ownership of that community that
will draw out the protective instinct of that individual towards the nation. The individual must
understand, that the protection of this community is also a protection of the individual citizens.
Just how dangerous is this lack of consistency between protecting individual right and the
right of the community? Say that one takes a bath everyday so we can be sure that this person
likes to be clean. However this cleanliness is not transferred to the community. The person will
still disregard garbage cans and make a mess of the place with the thinking that it is not the
individual's responsibility. The state, in this case has been neglected.
Or a case where one steals from others because the small group to which the individual
belongs to dared him to steal. Here, loyalty to the peer group supersede loyalty to the nameless
others (the nation-community). Sooner or later, the class between self/familial interest and that of
the state will ruin one of the other.
In determining the problems that might be encountered in nation building, the
membership of the individual in an institution is also worth looking into. The citizen is not just a
member of the nation but also of the agencies of the state, namely -- church, school, government,
family, mass media, etc. Usually, the valued needed for a true democratic concern for the nation
is taught in these agencies especially the family -- but is a limited proportion only consumerate to
the needs of the family.
What will nurture such communal concern would be in their socialization process, where
the young people are taught to follow the rules and take note of their action when the larger
community is watching their actions. This will make them consider how their actions might
affect others. However, we can see that the emphasis on the family, as basic institution and the
primordial importance given to by tradition, our culture and by law, in a way hampers the true
exercise of one's duty as a citizen.
Art. 2, Sec. 12
The state recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a
basic autonomous social institution...
The need of the family overrides all other needs, including that of the state - even when
the state is at risk. thus, we cannot rely much on Filipino family for the formation of nationalism.
The family usually looks for school when it comes to teaching kids about nationhood. This puts
pressure on the school to teach these, not just about citizenship but also about democracy --
something that might not be directly addressed especially during the early years of the child's
education. There should be an emphasis on the correlation of a citizen's rights and duties and
how this is factored in a democratic system.
Such a multi layered affiliation becomes more pronounced when talking to Muslims,
where most of them would associate Filipino with Christians. Such connotation makes them
wary of using that term and they would be ready to clarify that they are Filipinos in paper only.
such absence is a serious problem that has to be addressed if we want a truly reconciled and
united nation. They don't feel that there is a benefit that they can get from the state, in fact it is
worsened by the sense of alienation they already feel.
What can be concluded is that, the less benefit a citizen enjoys from the state, the less one
feels affiliation with the nation. Such is true also of traditional practices. If the citizen feels
alienated from the community/state, then the less one will feel emotional link to it.
From this, definition of a Filipino should be taken from the grass-roots. The political self
must be defined according to the needs of the citizen taking into account the variance of practices
and traditions. This is not an easy feat because members of the Filipino nation are very diverse.
How far should we take in the ethnic, religious, traditional practices that might deviate
from the law imposed on the general public? Example of this would be the Sharia Law and the
confusion this might give Muslims. There are instances that they can exercise their rights under
the Constitution but they may not exercise it because of a Muslim law. How will the state protect
them in case they choose to reject that particular Muslim law?
The citizen must therefore be not just free or not just responsible; the citizen must be free
and responsible. What should be done now is to develop a sense of community at the national
level and empower them, making them active participants in the democratic process. This
participation should not only be through election but more importantly, in the decision on how
they should continue with their way of living without destroying other unique culture. This will
be realized if true democracy is practiced and the two fundamental policies of due process and
equal protection of the law are applied consistently. Where the ideals of justice, fairness, equity
and liberty are given, then we can assume that democracy is working, not just for the majority
but for the minority groups as well.
Thus, the project proposes the following action agenda. Improve the political and social
environment and reduce poverty through structural reforms in order to foster a sense of
community, and enable citizens to exercise their rights and fulfill their obligations.

Developing a Democratic Culture

What hinders the growth of the culture of the culture of democracy?
As suggested by Zialcita (1997), in order for us to establish a democratic culture, the following
values are necessary:
1.) Respect for and affirmation of the individual. This entails recognizing that every individual
has inherent rights. Thus, we say that one's rights end where another person's right begins.
2.) Recognition of the inherent dignity of all human beings. Once recognition is made of such
dignity, then it is easier for us to treat people as ends in themselves.
3.) Concern for the public good. We must understand that our individual rights are also limited
by the power of the state. The welfare of the state is considered together with the civil rights.
4.) Willingness to listen to others. This is consistent with the three above. If we respect the
individual, then we should be giving time to listen and understand the claim of that individual.
All these imply the need for us to help the anonymous stranger, that is – more than our
individual families – we should also involve and care for our nation. And that should be a major
part of our Political Identity, an identity closely tied to being a Filipino citizen in heart and mind.

SUMMARY
From an investigation of our history, the search and definition of a truly Filipino identity
has been marked with a lot of challenges. But it is a challenge that we are willing to meet head
on to ensure our survival as a nation.
In this globalization age, it is easy to be swept away by modernization. But as long as we
continue nurturing that search, we will be able to stand as one Filipino nation.