Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Then the Chinese government was actually stupid enough to declare war on these countries, calling it "foreign powers intervening to suppress a rebellion" is pretty inaccurate. It's a miracle that China wasn't completely finished and divided by them (that would've saved us so much trouble tbh).
if China was finished by then, wouldn't you be stuck with China right now (unless you ancesters were in Taiwan already in 1860s)?
But agree the Chinese empress was stupid enough to declare war on all foreign powers, but at that time, it made sense for HER (not the country), because it was a strategy to divert the attention and remain in power.
How do you blame the US for Marcos? He was in place not at the behest of the US, but because the US did not intervene (which would have made people angry). You also don't understand Burma, but you pretend to with your ridiculous sigh.
The part you got was right was that the US was not responsible fotr the Marcos corruption per se. Perhaps it would have been different if the US had intervened and took Marcos down, but that was a huge undertaking and if it had gone wrong then your grievances would have been so multiplied.
I am not implying US aid had a large measure in the Philippines domestic policy. Repeatedly I've stated that that Philippines issues are almost completely domestic. My entire argument is that the US has did relatively little in domestic policies and that you should be leery of a government trying to find a foriegn bogeyman. I don't see why you keep saying otherwise and now doing your ridilous sighs,
*sigh* what are you even going on about *sigh*
Remember Manuel Noriega? The US made him then removed him. Same time period. Think on that fact for a bit.
I don't think you're that young, so have you really forgotten how the Cold War was? If you even took a cursory scan of the FOIA documents of the CIA on the Marcos era (though heavily sanitized), you'd notice one running theme: make sure the communists don't gain too much power in the Philippines. The US intervened with everything during the Cold War era, just like the Soviets and to a lesser extent, China.
Duterte isn't blaming bogeymen, he's calling out the US for its hypocrisy. I mean sheesh, Duterte's ex-wife Elizabeth Zimmerman is a Filipina of American descent. This has nothing to do with xenophobia or racism. It's about finally moving out from the shadow of foreign policies that do not benefit us.
I don't think you're that young, so have you really forgotten how the Cold War was? If you even took a cursory scan of the FOIA documents of the CIA on the Marcos era (though heavily sanitized), you'd notice one running theme: make sure the communists don't gain too much power in the Philippines. The US intervened with everything during the Cold War era, just like the Soviets and to a lesser extent, China.
Duterte isn't blaming bogeymen, he's calling out the US for its hypocrisy. I mean sheesh, Duterte's ex-wife Elizabeth Zimmerman is a Filipina of American descent. This has nothing to do with xenophobia or racism. It's about finally moving out from the shadow of foreign policies that do not benefit us.
I'm going to reiterate this--American foreign policy played out differently in different countries. Post WWII, domestic intervention in the Philippines was minimal. This does not mean US intervention in Panama, Cuba, Iran, Iraq and many others was minimal. Never have I said US foreign policy was some great benevolent force--in fact, I believe the exact opposite. However, that doesn't change anything I've said. Instead, you're assuming things I did not say or even opposite of what I've stated.
I stand corrected. Doesn't change the conclusion though.
No it doesn't. They came earlier.
Quote:
As to the Empress, the empire was finished after her death, so for her, it was a success. She manged to cling to power until she died.
Actually no. After the war she was completely loathed by like, everyone, so she had to agree to give up the power and make China a Constitutional Monarchy, aka copying Japan.
Educational post. I knew nothing about any of that stuff (still don't really, but now I know something to look up).
Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Existential Monkey
Sure about that? Remember they've held on to Puerto Rico, Guam, Hawaii, and Cuba. Yes Cuba was technically independent by 1902 but the US retained the right to intervene whenever they wanted.
This was America's brief foray into imperialism and the height of yellow journalism. The Iraq War of the turn of the 20th century and widely discussed among western countries. Especially given that the US entered the colonial theatre at a time when most colonial empires were already breaking up. Read Mark Twain's political writings to understand the political atmosphere of the US at the time. He was one of the more prominent Americans who saw America's acquisition of the Philippines for what it was - a betrayal and an invasion.
Hundreds of thousands of people died during that war. And from the accounts of soldiers and the various atrocities committed during the war, they treated us as little more than dogs. Even coining the slur "island n****rs" for us. That's not the actions of a benevolent "protector".
Besides, the Philippines was not exactly in need of "civilization". Remember it was a Spanish colony for 300 years by this time. And it permeated every aspect of Filipino life. Much more than its neighbors under other colonial masters. The excuse of "protecting" and "teaching" Filipinos how to govern themselves is exactly that, an excuse. There were no threats from anyone except America itself, and we were perfectly capable of governing ourselves. The first Philippine Republic was actually established during the Philippine-American War, and it was from there that we derived our current national flag and date of independence (instead of July 4, the actual date the Americans released us).
Filipinos were also treated well under Queen isabel II of Spain by the late 1800s. Especially after the Spanish loss of most of their Latin American colonies (including Nueva Hispania, i.e. Mexico). Universal education was decreed and the rise of the educated middle class (the Ilustrados) was what allowed Filipinos to imagine greater political self-determination in the first place. But even then, only true rebels wanted independence, most of the Filipinos (including the national martyr, Jose Rizal) wanted direct representation in the Spanish court, and the prosecution of the corruption of colonial government officials.
The US only released the Philippines when espionage and diplomacy matured and became a far cheaper alternative for maintaining hegemonic influence rather than having to waste money on protectorates. Most of the coups and dictators of the mid-20th century were the result of the spy games of the US and the Soviets. Games which intermittently blossomed into full-blown proxy wars like the ones in Korea, Angola, Afghanistan, Cuba, and of course, Vietnam.
Well since the rebels decided to attack the U.S. pretty much the day after the Treaty of Paris I guess we will never know. 300 years of letting Spain own you and the minute the Philippines had a second chance they decided to start attacking. The Philippines would not have survived on its own back then Japan would have attacked it before WWII. Japan always wanted the Philippines. Japan would have treated you as a slave nation back in those days.
How did they think they were going to beat the well armed American military with prehistoric weapons? Sounds like diplomacy may have been the better option.
Last edited by wanderlust76; 01-29-2017 at 05:21 PM..
Well since the rebels decided to attack the U.S. pretty much the day after the Treaty of Paris I guess we will never know. 300 years of letting Spain own you and the minute the Philippines had a second chance they decided to start attacking. The Philippines would not have survived on its own back then Japan would have attacked it before WWII. Japan always wanted the Philippines. Japan would have treated you as a slave nation back in those days.
How did they think they were going to beat the well armed American military with prehistoric weapons? Sounds like diplomacy may have been the better option.
See this is exactly what I meant. The firm belief that Americans were "saving" us. And the even firmer belief that we were a bunch of savages armed only with "prehistoric weapons." LOL
This is a colorized image of the Philippines at the turn of the century. Do these look like tribal huts to you?
These were the Filipino troops in the Philippine-American War. Do they look like tribesmen with spears and grass skirts to you?
It wasn't the Massacre of the Wounded Knee or the Matabele Wars, no matter how much the American press at that time wanted it to be (see Yellow Journalism and Propaganda of the Spanish-American War). This was what US propaganda made us out to be:
Yes, we stood no chance against the professional standing armies of the US, but where do y'all keep getting this idea that we were f-ing prehistoric savages? The sheer ignorance boggles me.
But then again, it feeds your myth that the US were "civilizing" us, despite you already contradicting your own self when you mentioned our three centuries under Spain.
Those "rebels" pledged to help the Americans against Spain in return for independence. So yep. Diplomacy, check. They even bought weapons from the Americans (a second shipment of which were never delivered). THAT was the agreement. And you wonder why they attacked? You really believe that after fighting for independence for decades, people would just bow down to another colonial master? Because THAT was what the US was. Don't sugarcoat it with anything else.
They fought because they were being invaded AGAIN. By someone they thought they could trust.
Furthermore, Japan only focused on the Philippines precisely because it was colonial territory of the US.
I can repeat the same phrase back to you: The [insert Asian country here] would not have survived on its own back then Japan would have attacked it before WWII.
Guess what? They did. We'd have been invaded anyway and treated as a slave nation regardless of the status of our sovereignty, but so were every other nation surrounding us. And aside from Manchuria and European colonial holdings (Hong Kong, Singapore, etc.), almost all other countries survived relatively unscathed (Thailand for example). We didn't. Being subjected to numerous atrocities and losing our capital city, because unlike most everyone else, we remained loyal to the US.
And you're also probably unaware that even before the attack on Pearl Harbor, Americans were already planning to abandon the Philippines to the Japanese (which they did). So much for protection, eh?
Do you even know what Japan's goals were in the war? Like most westerners you probably think everyone fought WW2 purely because of Nazism, not even stopping to consider why an Asian nation would be allied to Germany if the goal was only Aryan Supremacy. Japan wanted the creation of the Dai Toa Kyoeiken, the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. They wanted to "free Asia from Western imperialism". Sure, it was an excuse, like most war rationales, but it also meant they really wouldn't have reason to treat us worse than they would if we hadn't been a Western colony.
Heck, a little history lesson: Indonesia gained its independence because of Japanese support during WW2. All these horror stories of how the Japanese would have destroyed us in WW2 without the US are just that. Horror stories. Meant to justify an occupation that otherwise can not be excused.
Because let's face it, if WW2 never happened, you'd have found some other excuse to justify the American Commonwealth of the Philippines anyway. It's not like I'm asking for reparations or anything. Just for a little bit of shame and acknowledgment that yes, the US occupation was wrong.
Last edited by Existential Monkey; 01-30-2017 at 04:50 AM..
Actually no. After the war she was completely loathed by like, everyone, so she had to agree to give up the power and make China a Constitutional Monarchy, aka copying Japan.
Of course that never succeeded.
You mean your ancestors went to Taiwan before 1900? OK, I will take your word for it.
You don't seem to know the history well enough. The empress was supportive of the reform long before that, ever since the 1860s.
But I guess it doesn't matter to you since you are apparently obsessed with your little personal vendentta and will try to prove me wrong whatever I say.
China had a long history of forbidding women from getting involved in politics, yet she managed to hold on to power under such tumultuous period for half a century. Yes, she was quite successful and capable I would say.
You mean your ancestors went to Taiwan before 1900? OK, I will take your word for it.
You don't seem to know the history well enough. The empress was supportive of the reform long before that, ever since the 1860s.
But I guess it doesn't matter to you since you are apparently obsessed with your little personal vendentta and will try to prove me wrong whatever I say.
China had a long history of forbidding women from getting involved in politics, yet she managed to hold on to power under such tumultuous period for half a century. Yes, she was quite successful and capable I would say.
The empress dowager was supportive of some types of reform at certain rates in some sectors and that shifted over time. However, the areas she was mainly supportive of were technological and military reforms and little in the way of governance.
A vast majority of people in Taiwan have ancestry that was from before 1900. Partly due to the divisive policies of the KMT administration, popular culture in Taiwan has common use terms dividing people of old stock ancestry and those who came post-WW2 commonly termed as waisheng ren (外省人). Since the terms are common, studies within the country have tried to tabulate that split demographic with studies pointing to about 14% with a tiny bit of variance of post WWII Chinese ancestry, leaving the vast majority as pre-Japanese colonization (1895 and earlier) ancestry, Chinese or otherwise.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 01-30-2017 at 07:42 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
