Category Archives: Colonization
How Colonialism Shaped the Filipino Character
Ask a hundred Filipinos what makes a Filipino a Filipino, and you will likely get a hundred different answers — hospitality, resilience, family, faith, humor, an uncanny gift for finding joy in hardship. Ask a hundred more, and darker answers will surface too: a fatalism that shrugs at misfortune, a habit of measuring themselves against foreigners and coming up short in their own eyes, a suspicion of the next province that borders on hostility. Both sets of answers are true. Neither tells the whole story on its own.
This four-part essay is an attempt to tell that fuller story — not by cataloging Filipino traits as though they simply exist, the way eye color or height exists, but by asking where they came from. A people’s character is not accidental. It is built, layer upon layer, from the specific things that happen to them over specific centuries, under specific rulers. For the Filipino, those centuries were largely colonial ones: 333 years under Spain, nearly half a century more under the United States. To understand the Filipino today without reckoning with those years is to admire a house’s furniture while ignoring the foundation on which it was built.
This essay draws on historical record as much as personal reflection — the documented mechanisms of colonial administration alongside the lived, inherited patterns still visible in Filipino life today. Where the two meet is where this essay lives.
Part One lays that foundation, tracing the Filipino from a people already possessed of their own culture and governance before any galleon arrived, through the long violence of Spanish rule, to the betrayal that followed when a nation Filipinos had mistaken for an ally simply became their next colonizer.
Part Two turns to what survived — and what may have even been strengthened — through all of it: the hospitality, the resilience, the family loyalty and communal spirit that colonization tested but did not break.
Part Three turns to the cost — the fatalism, the regionalism, the colonial mentality that took root during those same centuries, planted deliberately by rulers who profited from a people divided against themselves and unsure of their own worth.
Part Four brings both halves together, arguing that the strength and the wound were never separate stories. They came from the same three hundred years, visited on the same people, and they live on, side by side, in the same national character today.
The writer does not pretend to have the final word on Filipino identity — no single essay could. But for a people whose history has too often been written by outsiders, and too rarely examined by themselves, even an incomplete reckoning is worth attempting. As you read what follows, you might find it useful to ask the same questions of your own family, your own province, your own habits of thought — because the history in these four parts is not abstract. It is, in some quiet way, still writing itself through each of us.
Understanding the wound is the first task. What a Filipino chooses to do with that understanding — for himself, his family, his country — is a separate reckoning, for another time. But understanding why we are the way we are remains the first step toward deliberately deciding who we choose to become next.
How Colonialism Shaped the Filipino Character (2nd of 4 parts)
Filipinos often ask, “What would the Philippines be like today had Spain never colonized the island nation? Would the Filipino character have developed the way it has now had the Spaniards not succeeded in keeping the natives in chains for more than three centuries?”
What if the Americans had honored the principle that “governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed” [4], and decided in 1898 not to stay, allowing the Filipinos to govern themselves instead? The Americans should have known better. That very principle drove their own declaration of independence in 1776, and it is held up as the model for the right to self-determination — the same right they denied the Filipinos when they colonized the Philippines. The Americans justified their occupation by claiming the Filipinos were not ready for self-governance. But how could they have been so certain? Even so, the Filipinos would certainly have preferred to chart their own destiny as a nation, whatever the consequences. The world will never know what might have become of the Philippines had the Americans handed over the reins of government. It is not certain the Filipinos would have succeeded — but one thing is clear: the Philippines did not become a better nation because the Americans occupied it either.
It would have been a tremendous boost to Filipino pride had they been allowed to continue their war with Spain — a war they were winning — before Spanish and American strategists staged what later became known as the “Mock Battle of Manila Bay,” a battle the Americans claimed to have won. The plan was concocted to keep Manila, the nation’s capital, from falling into the hands of Filipino revolutionaries. Imagine how differently the Filipino psyche might have evolved had that victory been real and theirs. The nation’s character would have taken a very different shape. But it was not meant to be.
As it happened, the Philippines was colonized by both Spain and America, and the evolution of the Filipino psyche did not unfold as it should have had that colonization never occurred. So how did that colonization shape the Filipino character? How did Spanish cruelty and American treachery impact the evolution of Filipino values and traits?
A nation’s character is expressed through the values and traits of its people. These develop over time, shaped by the events of a nation’s life and by the environment in which its people live.
Filipinos carry both positive and negative values and traits. Among the positive are hospitality and resilience.
Filipinos are famous for their hospitality. They treat visitors, especially foreigners, with remarkable generosity, offering them the best of what they have. As hosts, Filipinos go out of their way to make guests comfortable, providing the finest amenities available. The Spaniards experienced this hospitality firsthand upon arriving on the islands and took full advantage of it. Though there were places where the natives met them with hostility, they were, on the whole, welcomed warmly.
This hospitality is sometimes mistaken for subservience. Some argue that centuries of colonization left Filipinos with a sense of inferiority, making them overly gracious toward foreigners — that they were conditioned by their former colonial masters to obey, serve, and never question. This stereotype has been reinforced by the number of Filipinos working abroad as domestic helpers.
Those who look at Filipino hospitality this way are mistaken. Warmth toward strangers and generosity toward guests were already woven into pre-colonial Filipino custom, embedded in values these people held long before any foreign flag was planted on their shores. A trait rooted in something that old cannot be reduced to a symptom of something that came centuries later. Those who insist otherwise choose to view the trait through a negative lens, mistaking a virtue that predates colonization for a wound it supposedly caused.
Filipinos are naturally caring, friendly, polite, and respectful. Their hospitality reflects genuine humanity, not subservience. They are highly relational people who form connections easily, adapt quickly to different cultures, and embrace foreigners without judgment. If the world were tested for what Howard Gardner calls “interpersonal intelligence,” Filipinos would likely rank among the highest.
This trait did not disappear with the arrival of the Spaniards — it was reinforced. The Spaniards introduced Christianity, and embracing that faith gave Filipinos still more reason to love and care for others.
Genuine concern for others comes naturally to Filipinos. Beyond domestic work, many serve abroad as doctors, nurses, caregivers, nannies, and teachers. Filipinos are not driven by ego; they can take on menial work, believing that “any necessary work that pays an honest wage carries its own honor and dignity” [5]. This is why many accept such jobs overseas. At the same time, skilled Filipino workers and professionals are sought after in many countries, and Filipino artists can be found working around the world — proof of Filipino intelligence and talent.
Filipinos are also resilient, almost unwilling to give up. Both the natural calamities that have plagued the nation since time immemorial and the painful experience of colonization have hardened them. They rise again after serious setbacks, their ingenuity and resourcefulness helping them find a way out of difficult situations, their trademark humor allowing them to laugh even through the hardest of times.
Another trait that survived colonization is close family ties. Perhaps the harsh rule of Spain and America drew Filipino families closer — in times of sorrow and desperation, during those long years of subjugation, they had nothing to rely on but each other. This trait runs deep: Filipinos maintain close bonds with relatives to nearly the fourth degree of consanguinity, and parents often allow their children to remain in the family home even after marriage.
Strong among Filipinos, too, is the spirit of “Bayanihan” — communal unity, something akin to volunteerism. It shows up in many forms, most famously in the old tradition of neighbors helping a family relocate their home — long bamboo poles slid beneath a traditional house and carried by volunteers to its new location [6]. The tradition persists even now that homes are built of wood and concrete; the spirit of Bayanihan lives on in other forms, especially during natural calamities, when Filipinos readily offer help and resources to neighbors in need. This, too, is part of the innate humanity that Christianity helped strengthen.
This same resilience and devotion to family now sustains the nation in a form the pre-colonial Filipino could never have imagined. Millions work abroad, apart from spouses and children for years at a stretch, so that money sent home might build a house, put a sibling through school, or cover a parent’s medical bills. The remittance economy that keeps much of the Philippines afloat today is not a modern invention so much as a very old loyalty finding a new outlet in a globalized world — proof that the traits colonization tested centuries ago are still doing the very same work today.
But Filipinos have negative traits as well.
___________________________
[6] http://groups.csail.mit.edu
How Colonialism Shaped the Filipino Character (3rd of 4 Parts)
How Colonialism Shaped the Filipino Character (1st of 4 parts)
To better appreciate who and what the Filipino is, one has to decipher the Filipino psyche and identify the factors that contributed to its formation. An in-depth analysis of the character of this people would require a thorough examination of their history and racial origins. Filipinos cannot be figured out by leaning on stereotypes or by viewing them through a supremacist lens.
Those who claim to know Filipinos simply by piecing together information from the internet are gravely mistaken. Those who form assumptions after reading a news item or two — without even checking the credibility of the source — should hold their horses.
The pre-colonial Filipino belonged to a race whose culture and gene pool were already a mix of Negrito, Indones, Malay, Arab, Hindu, and Chinese influences, a spirit shaped, for better or worse, by the geography of the islands and their climate. A genetic and cultural identity was already flourishing in this part of Southeast Asia before the Portuguese explorer Magellan and his Spanish expedition landed in Mactan in 1521. A national identity was still evolving when the Spaniards, led by Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, returned in 1565 to establish a stronghold in what the Europeans would later call “Las Islas Filipinas.”
Long before any galleon touched these shores, the islands were already organized into barangays — communities governed by a datu, bound by custom rather than written code, where land and harvest were often held and worked in common. Women held real standing in that world: many served as babaylan, ruling as spiritual and healing authorities in their own right, in a system where leadership did not automatically bypass them the way it would under the friars and the patriarchy they imported. Mutual aid between neighbors — the impulse that would later be called Bayanihan — was already a fact of daily life, not a virtue invented by hardship. The Filipino, in other words, arrived at the colonial encounter already possessing values worth protecting, not empty of them.
The 1989 discovery of the Laguna Copperplate proved — or affirmed what historians had long suspected — that a well-organized form of government based on customary law existed in the Philippines long before the Spaniards arrived [1]. The pre-colonial Filipino was no lost soul waiting to be rescued from the Dark Ages. If anything, it may have been the other way around: the arrival of the Europeans could just as easily have disrupted a culture already on its own path of development, for better or worse. A people was already becoming something, and that becoming veered off course the moment Western colonizers succeeded in subduing them.
For 333 years, the Filipinos lived at the mercy of the Spanish conquistadors. Scattered revolts broke out across the country to overthrow the invaders from the Iberian Peninsula, but each was crushed in turn. The most significant of these was the uprising led by Francisco Dagohoy in Bohol, which lasted more than 80 years (1744–1829). These early attempts to overthrow Spanish rule failed for three reasons: they lacked a unifying national character, were confined to limited geographic areas, and were driven by narrow, localized grievances rather than a shared national cause [2]. It was not until the 1896 revolution that Filipino resistance finally succeeded, leading to the declaration of Philippine independence in 1898.
That mercy, it must be said, was never absolute. Spain’s writ never fully reached the Muslim sultanates of Mindanao and Sulu, nor the highland peoples of the Cordillera — both of whom resisted colonization throughout, and in the case of the Moro sultanates, arguably never fully surrendered at all. What follows in this series, then, is largely the story of the lowland, Christianized Filipino — the majority experience, but not the whole of it. The character traced here is real, but it is not universal, and any honest reckoning with what colonization did to “the Filipino” should say so plainly.
But independence was short-lived.
The Americans, whom the Filipinos believed had come to help them build a republic, had other plans. They persuaded Emilio Aguinaldo, leader of the revolt against Spain, that America had no interest in claiming a colony — that they had come only to free the natives from Spanish rule. In reality, the Treaty of Paris of 1898 saw Spain cede the Philippines to the United States for $20 million, worth well over half a billion dollars today — one of the terms the two powers negotiated and concluded without so much as consulting the Filipino people. The Filipinos watched, powerless, as Spain — too proud to surrender to the very “Indios” it had enslaved for centuries — surrendered instead to the Americans.
Would the Americans really have paid the Spanish that enormous sum and walked away with nothing in return? Hell no — that’s what any geopolitical expert would tell you. America, an emerging world power at the time, needed a foothold in the Pacific, and the Philippines was the ideal prize. So, contrary to the promise Aguinaldo later admitted he had naively believed, the Americans declared the Philippines a territory ceded to them by Spain.
This betrayal was a bitter blow to the Filipinos. After centuries of resisting Spanish domination, they had finally hoped to chart their own destiny as a nation — only to find themselves facing a new colonial master. The search for freedom was far from over.
When the Spaniards withdrew, the Filipinos took up arms against a far more powerful American force. It was David against Goliath — and in this telling, Goliath won. But it did not end for lack of trying: the Filipinos stood their ground and fought as fiercely as they could, gallantly resisting for three long years before losing the Philippine-American War (1899–1902).
And so the Philippines changed hands once more — from the Spanish yoke to the American.
Once in control, the Americans moved quickly to make sure no second uprising would follow the first. Laws like the Sedition Law of 1901 — which imposed death or long imprisonment on anyone who so much as advocated independence, even by peaceful means — and the Flag Law of 1907, which banned the display of the Philippine flag anywhere in the country, extinguished what little remained of the nationalist fire the revolution had lit [9].
As the Philippines transitioned from Spanish to American rule, elements of both cultures became woven into Filipino society, leaving a deep imprint on the nation’s values, traditions, and even its gene pool. The policies each colonizer enforced in turn undeniably shaped the evolution of the Filipino character.
The 20th century saw the rise of a distinct post-colonial Filipino identity — a fusion of Asian and European influences, shaped by a history of colonization and hardened by resilience in the face of frequent natural disasters. This character continues to evolve even now, blending the past with contemporary influences.
The parts that follow will trace exactly that transformation — the hospitality, resilience, and close family ties that colonization tempered rather than created; the fatalism, regionalism, and colonial mentality it left behind as open wounds; and, in the end, the paradox of a people whose greatest strength and deepest self-doubt trace back to the very same three centuries.
How did these centuries of colonization shape the Filipino character? How did Spanish cruelty and American betrayal mold the values and traits of the Filipino people? These questions remain central to understanding what it means to be Filipino today.
___________________________
[1] philippinestudies.net
[2] asianjournalusa.com
[3] http://www.thefilipinomind.com
Notes: Images used were taken from the following sites:
lifestyle.inquirer.net
angelsinasphere.wordpress.com
http://www.boundless.com
How Colonialism Shaped the Filipino Character (2nd of 4 Parts)
M.A.D. LIGAYA
M.A.D. L I G A Y A 