#criticalcommentary

[theblackbasketballchannel]

🤔 Stephen A. Smith's Critical Takedown: Does Whitlock Have a Counter? 🏀🚨 #CriticalCommentary #NBAAnalysis 📈🗨️ https://youtube.com/live/AJ-BLZRB95k

[theblackbasketballchannel]

🤔 Stephen A. Smith's Critical Takedown: Does Whitlock Have a Counter? 🏀🚨 #CriticalCommentary #NBAAnalysis 📈🗨️ https://youtube.com/live/AJ-BLZRB95k

[politicsandanika]

Post-Colonialism: A Critical Commentary

Colonialism is basically the extension of a nation’s rule over territory beyond its original borders. It’s colonizing another population subjecting them to political domination. But, adding the prefix “post”, how does the definition change?

Post colonialism talks about the situation of previously and currently colonized countries. The Post-colonial theory deals with the reading and writing of the literature during this time as it deals with the people, culture & politics. Here, there’s a focus on oppression in the political, economic, social and psychological fields of those colonized.

Edward Said coined the word “Orientalism” describing the difference between the orient and the occident. This was published in 1978 that explained the stereotypes of the Orient which is Asia. The image of this “orient” is basically an Arab portrait. Somehow, the movie Aladdin would suffice. It talks about Arab culture and the people to be exotic, backward, uncivilized and dangerous compared to Europe and the United States. Edward Said was able to define this as the acceptance in the West of “the basic distinction between East and West as the starting point for elaborate theories, epics, novels, social descriptions, and political accounts concerning the Orient, its people, customs, ‘mind,’ destiny and so on” in this book. 

Things have changed from the time this notion was popular but has the thought developed? I think that up until today there is still a massive distinction between the Orient and the Occidental. The Orient can be divided into two now--Arabian (Middle-Eastern) and Asian (Chinese). No matter how much people say there is an acceptance to these different cultures, the subconscious judgments still remain. I’m not going to be a hypocrite and say I don’t live that way because I do also. When i see an Arab man, I can’t help but already categorize him to be bad. I’m ashamed of this, definitely and I have been working on this behavior of mine for a while now but I know I’m not the only one. The US and Europe will always seem to be superior over the rest of the world no matter how hard different cultures try to excel. We look at them so highly and maybe it’s cause of History. People can never really let go of when the nation was a colony. When these whites or the occidental was in control. I mean, most of Asia’s history has had European or American rule. It’s still here, even after a whole century. 

Frantz Fanon was another very influential person in this field as he took on the issue of decolonization. His works “Black Skin, White Masks” and “The Wretched of the Earth” have given the world very effective statements in the anti-colonial revolutionary thought. He talked about colonialism being “destructive” and “harmful to the mental health of native people subjected to colonization”. If Edward Said focused on these Americans and Europeans vs. these Arabs and Asians, Frantz Fanon had these whites against the African Americans, these Negros or what they are commonly classified as “blacks”. He wrote “The Negro enslaved by his inferiority, the white man enslaved by his superiority alike behave in accordance with a neurotic orientation” which I find to be such a powerful statement. He expounded on the racial matter talking about Language. He pointed out that “when the black man speaks the language of the white man, the black man assumes the culture and the civilization of his oppressor. The conqueror has no interest in the culture of the conquered who are considered in need of civilizing.” He then described decolonization as “the meeting of two forces, opposed to each other by their very nature, which in fact, opposed to each other by their very nature, which in fact owe their originality to that sort of substantification which results from and is nourished by the situation in the colonies.”

Racism is very common today and is usually geared towards the black people. I guess Fanon is right to say that these are black people in white masks because these black people act relatively alike with the whites. Historically speaking, you can’t blame them as they’ve been slaves to these white people for most of their history. It couldn’t be helped but to accept that kind of culture and tradition as their own. Would it be right to say they, at that time, probably have not established a certain identity as a people? I’ve come to notice but only until Martin Luther King have these black people truly stood up and became their own. Comparing them today from where they were 50 years ago, they’ve definitely developed. But it’s hard, definitely to let go of that idea that these blacks and whites are equal. Even if the laws state it, even if different organizations push it, Has it really changed? Do white people treat black people the same? Maybe for some, but definitely not all. There still are many discriminatory actions and unequal treatment.

Again with these whites. They have definitely contributed most of the world’s wonders in early history in terms of discovery but in time, other cultures and people were able to do the same, or even better! But even if people have surpassed them, they still remain higher. It’s harder to accept than to understand no matter how many people in the academe try to reform this. It would take so much more time to achieve the equality we all desire but it’s working, slowly. 

[politicsandanika]

The Indigenous Filipino - Critical Commentary

I believe that the Filipinos are one of the most indigenous people on earth. Despite the diversity, we are native and homegrown more than what I see in other countries. It’s a good thing to know that we have theories to support this claim. Here we have Sikolohiyang Pilipino, Pilipinolohiya, and Pantayong Pananaw. 

Sikolohiyang Pilipino or in English, Filipino Psychology, talks about the psychology based on the Filipino thoughts, feelings, behaviors that come from indigenous filipino language, methods and maybe even traditions. This theory encompasses the identity and national consciousness, the involvement and awareness in society, the psychology behind the language and culture and the different applications of this Filipino psychology. It’s best to summarize this by saying that the psychology of Filipinos are perceived traits by foreigners and expressed by Filipinos. In this sense, we have an identity. We are categorized by something we do as a people. It could be the hospitality, the habit of pointing with our lips or whatever else. Despite the variety of people we have, there are still common acts and traditions we as an entire Filipino nation do. It’s very refreshing to know that there is an interest and attempt in somehow reconstructing and reviewing the Filipino people. Through the comparisons made towards the western theories and colonizers, we are then able to understand our culture and history more as a nation. 

Pilipinolohiya talks about how the Filipino people think, the Filipino culture and the Philippine society. It tackles on “how Filipino” one is through the different fields.  It is studied by looking at the core values of being a Filipino and not just the physical attributes of a Filipino. The main proponents of this theory are Covar and Salazar with their objective of providing an intensive study of the Philippine cultures and traditions by using local insights on how to study it properly. They aimed this not to contradict western ideologies but showcase the views of those who are actually living in the country showcasing and owning these values, thoughts and habits. It’s such a breather to have people actually going into depth with the Filipino people. It’s pretty interesting to know if we all do think alike in some way and to know the different thoughts of Filipino locals. 

Pantayong Pananaw is a concept by Dr. Zeus A. Salazar who is an advocate of a separate study on the nation’s language on history and social science. He talked about the conditions in the Philippines based from the reality of the past. To quote Dr. Zeus, “Pantayong Pananaw” as a descriptive concept can pertain to any social collectivity which possesses a relatively unified and internally articulated linguistic-cultural structure of communication and interaction and/or a sense of oneness of purpose and existence (ex., “The Japanese have a strong Pantayong Pananaw”). Ethnic and social collectivities (including class or gender aligned aggrupations) within a single nation can thus be said to possess PP. The relative “integration” of ethnic communities in a national collective does not arise from the eradication of their sense of PP but from the subsumption of their ethnic identity under that of the nation.” I’ve noticed that we Filipinos have a massive array of languages or dialects, whatever the right term for it is which may cause a somewhat language barrier inside the country. Although it’s not bad because Tagalog is widespread but we still rely on English very much. Salazar gives the option of eliminating outside forces to help Filipinos in maybe solving their own problems. I don’t have anything against the foreign people or the English language but I think that to somehow make the Filipino people sole, Unity and cooperation may be the fruit of it. Even if we are diverse, we are a nation and therefore we must act as one. The Western influence will always remain a hindrance but it’s not something we’ll have to live with forever. 

I am very appreciative of these studies because it helps people understand Filipinos in a more extensive way. It not only educates the foreign people about us but we ourselves too must learn from this. We often think we know much about ourselves but to our surprise, there’s still so much more to learn. Being a nation that is known to be divided because of diversity, we can still be a nation. There are many contradicting factors like the autonomous regions and the like but I don’t think it should be seen as a hindrance. We all share different beliefs and values that make us Filipinos, Filipino. Though, I do think with a little adjustments here and there we could work things out. Better policies, maybe? Better laws? I don’t know, but I’m hoping to find the answer one day.

[politicsandanika]

The far West - Western Critical Commentary

Is it really that far? I mean, the Philippines, no matter how much we would try to deny it, is in fact a colony of the West up to this day. The Philippine society is a mentally colonized by the whites. Filipinos today always strive to be whiter, to wear imported clothes, eat foreign dishes, admire and ask them if they'd prefer local brands or local dishes over these foreign goods and I'm sure most would disagree. The notion of beauty in this country is to be like those whites, the standard of being looked upon is if one speaks English and is living like those whites. Why is this so?

I guess that throughout our History, we've been the most systematic and organized when we were in the hands of these white men. My grandfather would even talk about how nice it was for the Filipinos when the Americans were in our territory. Everything was organized and efficient. Not to demean the capabilities of our own race but why couldn't we have done a job similar or even better? I think this is why we look up to the whites so much. That even up until now they remain in power all over the world. Maybe it's a subconscious thing that we aim to be them simply by just looking like them. Although, this causes a problem in our identity as Filipinos. If our nations can be prosperous and develop within themselves as themselves, why can't we? Are we too lazy or doubtful of our own abilities? 

What does this say about our Culture? My professor, Dr. Antonio Contreras said that being influenced by the Western Marxist ideologies Gramsci and the Frankfurt school, composed by Marcuse, Horkheiner, and Adorno, they pushed through knowing the popular culture inline with their knowledge with “cultural studies”, particularly those expressed through the mass media, as bearers of new forms of ideologies, and as domains for ideological struggles and contestations. Theorists provide us with many different and various explanations on why we could be what we are but I honestly don't find something to be the most accurate. It's a matter of perspective and preference. Who else would be able to define what we are as a people and why we are these things if not someone who is part of this mass? 

Our culture was deeply and is still deeply influenced by the West. We are constantly being shaped by these Americans and Europeans because we let them. Even our own political representatives are guilty of this. If the people we elect to represent us succumb to them, what more with the people? Also, the politics in those states are completely different from our politics here. The power they possess is quite far from the power our politics we'll have. They have strong will, manipulation and understanding of their field while ours are still probably confused on what their job is. Maybe we aspire to be like them so much we choose to stay under them. We may think we're being friends helping out other friends but we could also be colonized again.. slowly. But personally, I wouldn't mind being another state of the United States. Call me selfish or without love for her own country but if being theirs will help make most of the people in this country have better lives, then why not? I would rather join them than to pretend we're okay as a nation when we're not. I would rather be among them than to deny that we are even if we completely are. Wouldn't that be better? We can finally have an excuse to fall into their culture as if it was our own. 

Oops, wait. Is it not?