Ex-CCP Exec Says Globalization Has Ill Effects on Culture

by noelbarcelona ( | | | | | | )

Cultural worker, actor and art activist Fernando “Nanding” Josef talks about globalization and cultural imperialism. He insists that both are detrimental to the indigenous arts and culture of the Filipinos.


For Fernando “Nanding” Josef, former vice president and artistic director of the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP), globalization has adversely affected the development of local arts and culture.

Josef resigned last year from his leadership posts at the CCP in support of Rodolfo “Jun” Lozada Jr., one of the star witnesses to the controversial National Broadband Network (NBN) deal between the Philippine government and China’s Zhong Xing Telecommunication Equipment Company Limited (ZTE). The said project was marred by allegations of under-the-table deals.

Globalization disempowering poor nations

In an interview on Jan. 31 at the CCP grounds, Josef said that globalization has empowered the already powerful countries, while disempowering the underdeveloped nations such as the Philippines.

Isang masamang aspect ng globalization ay y’ong negative effect sa maliliit na bansa. Parang sa globalization, mas nagbigyan, o na-empower lalo ang mga powerful countries. Maski doon sa economic aspect of globalization, laging talung-talo ang mga mahihirap na bansa” (One of the negative aspects of globalization is its ill-effect on small countries. Under globalization, it seems, the powerful countries became more empowered. Even in the economic aspect of globalization, the smaller countries always lose), he said.

Globalization kills local culture

So doon sa aspect na ‘yon, mayroong ill-effect ang globalization pati na rin sa kultura, I think. Kasi, parang iyong phenomenon ng globalization, nawalan ng safety measures to protect the indigenous cultures of the different countries. Parang naging open, na-dilute yata, hanggang ngayon, I think, nadi-dilute ang cultural values ng iba’t ibang bansa, napapasukan ng mga values that are too Westernized”(On that aspect, globalization has an ill-effect also on [the local] culture. Because, it seems, in the phenomenon of globalization, the safety measures to protect the indigenous cultures of the different countries are lost. And the cultural values of the different countries, I think, are being—and continuously being—diluted, and becoming influenced by cultures that are too Westernized), he explained.

Thus, he said, the indigenous cultures have become endangered.

However, globalization had its positive effects as well, he said.

Mayroong mga advantage [ang globalization], in a sense that na yung mga bansa naman na may common grievances, nagkakaalaman na pare-pareho ang plights natin at I think, that also motivates them to come together and empower themselves [to counter the negative effects of globalization]” (There are advantages [in globalization], in a sense that the countries which have common grievances consult each other and share their experiences, and that motivates them to come together to empower themselves to counter the negative effects of globalization), he furthered.

Cultural imperialism: fruit of neoliberal globalization

Josef also assailed cultural imperialism.

Herbert Schiller (Nov. 5, 1919 – Jan. 29, 2000), an American media critic, sociologist, author and scholar, defined cultural imperialism as “the sum of the processes by which a society is brought into the modern world system, and how its dominating stratum is attracted, pressured, forced and sometimes bribed into shaping social institutions to correspond to or even to promote the values and structures of the dominant center of the system.”

Schiller said the US is the number one promoter of this practice. Its motivation, says Schiller, is the US desire for access to foreign markets and the belief in the superiority of American culture.

Ay, naku! Nakikialam ka, pinakikialaman mo y’ong kultura ng may kultura at ipinapasok mo y’ong sarili mong kultura” (Cultural imperialism is meddling in another country’s cultural affairs and imposing one’s own culture), Josef said when asked for his own definition of cultural imperialism.

He said cultural imperialists boast that their culture is superior to other cultures to lead other nations into setting aside their own cultures and accept foreign ones in their stead. (Bulatlat.com)

by diwa on March 5, 2009 - 6:34pm

Sa tingin ko, malamya pa ngang termino ang "dilute."  ang mas angkop na salita, para sa akin, bastardization. Totoo, ibinabandera nila ang kanilang kultura bilang superyor sa lahat at pinakadalisay laluna kaugnay sa "demokrasya." Sa kabilang panig naman, ginagamit naman nila ang kultura ng iba tangi kung may tubo silang makukuha dito. Sa kabuuan, lahat ibinababa sa antas ng kalakal, tinitingnan bilang kalakal, kung kaya inilalako.

by kislapalitaptap on March 6, 2009 - 9:20am

...Komersyalisasyon ng  Kultura.

parang Panagbenga, Lang-ay Festival at iba pang pang mga ...Val.


Kislap Alitaptap




by anakngfaraon on March 6, 2009 - 12:17pm


i don't understand how globalization can affect a country's culture.  i hope someone will be able to give me a concrete example.  thanks.



by kislapalitaptap on March 6, 2009 - 1:03pm

The Impact and Continuing Influence of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution on the New Democratic Movement in the Philippines
by Rey Claro Casambre 31 dec
International League of Peoples’ Struggle, Philippine Chapter


The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution (GPCR) in China from 1966-69 came at a time when the patriotic and democratic mass movement in the Philippines had stirred back to life and was gaining new-found vitality. This resurgent mass movement was in the form of a national democratic revolution that drew inspiration from the victorious Chinese new democratic revolution .

Like pre-1949 China, post-war Philippine society was semi-feudal and semi-colonial. The big compradors and big landlord classes dominated the backward, agrarian, pre-industrial economy. The Philippines was granted nominal independence by its US colonial master in 1946, but US imperialism retained control of the Philippine economy and dominated its political life. As in China, the new democratic revolution in the Philippines aimed to liberate the country from imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism.

Dr. Alice Guillermo, a leading Fiipino authority on Marxist theory on art and literature, wrote:

The ideas of Mao Zedong have been particularly relevant to the Philippines and the Third World because of the parallelism in the social conditions of China during its revolutionary period and those of the Philippines which is still at present engaged in a protracted revolutionary struggle

The resurgence of the anti-imperialist and democratic mass movement in the 1960s sparked an acrimonious political debate among various organizations claiming to be progressive and nationalist on the need for armed struggle, the nature of US imperialism, and the character of the local ruling classes. Certain organizations that claimed to be Marxist-Leninist, anti-imperialist and democratic carried the line of reformism and parliamentary struggle, and rejected armed struggle as premature and adventurist. They insisted that "US imperialism and the Marcos ruling clique are serious about carrying out genuine land reform and industrialization, as in Taiwan and Korea”…and that "the Philippines should first become capitalist before a socialist revolution can be carried out…”

The debate extended to international issues, such as the question of socialism and modern revisionism, and in particular the rift between the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) and the Communist Party of China (CPC). Those organizations that claimed to be Marxist-Leninist and anti-imperialist but rejected armed struggle aligned themselves with the CPSU, while those that called for a new democratic revolution with a socialist perspective aligned themselves with the CPC and adopted Mao Zedong Thought as a guiding theory.

The Students Cultural Association of UP (SCAUP) was formed in 1959 by Jose Ma. Sison, then a professor in the University of the Philippines. The SCAUP started as a student organization fighting for academic freedom against obscurantism, clericalism and red-baiting. It was the SCAUP that spearheaded the first massive student protest actions against the Macarthyist witchhunt that sparked the resurgence of the democratic mass movement.

Eventually, the SCAUP became a vehicle for (1) nationalist and patriotic consciousness and ideas, (2) scientific and progressive viewpoints and principles from the West and from patriotic and revolutionary movements in Asia, Africa, and Latin-America. Discussion groups (or "DGs” as they would later be popularly known after they had proliferated among the studentry, faculty and other sectors) were formed to discuss the ideas of Filipino nationalist and anti-imperialist personages such as Claro M. Recto, Lorenzo Tanada, Renato Constantino and Jose Ma. Sison, and various symposia were held on such issues as the US war of aggression in Vietnam. The more advanced members and activists studied the works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao.

The SCAUP activists would first form the core of the Kabataang Makabayan (KM)/ (Patriotic Youth) which was established in November 1964. In his founding speech, Jose Ma Sison first enunciated clearly the new democratic or national democratic line of the Philippine revolution . Like the new democracy line of China, it identifies US imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat nationalism as the basic problems of Philippine society. US imperialism and the ruling reactionary classes, the comprador big bourgeoisie and the big landlords are the principal targets of the revolution. The leading force is the working class, represented by its vanguard party. The main force is the peasantry. Together, they form the basic alliance for the revolution. This basic alliance, along with the petty-bourgeoisie, constitutes the basic forces. The basic forces, along with the national bourgeoisie, form the positive forces of the revolution. The main content of the Philippine revolution is agrarian reform. The national democratic revolution is the first stage of the Philippine revolution. The second stage, the socialist revolution, starts the moment the national democratic revolution is won and the reactionary ruling classes are overthrown. Thus, the new democratic revolution is a continuation of the 1898 Revolution against foreign domination and feudal oppression. But it is a different or new type of national or bourgeois democratic revolution because it is led by the working class and not the bourgeoisie, and because it has a socialist, not capitalist, perspective.

Thus, prior to the GPCR, there already existed a "core” of cadres and activists who were well-versed in Mao Zedong Thought and the Chinese revolution. They were also aware of the struggle between the CPC and the CPSU over the question of modern revisionism, socialist construction and socialist revolution. They avidly followed developments in China as well as in other socialist countries by listening regularly to Radio Peking and reading Peking Review and other materials from China.

Armando Liwanag, Chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines, (CPP) points out :

The works of Comrade Mao Zedong were scarce in the Philippines before the decade of the '60s. As early as the late '30s and during World War II, some of his works on the united front and armed struggle were already available to the comrades in the Chinese bureau in the Philippines. But these remained in the Chinese original. It would be through the efforts of the proletarian revolutionary cadres themselves that the works of Comrade Mao Zedong became readily available, with the assistance of Indonesian and Chinese comrades, at the time of the Great Leap Forward and subsequently the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution.

In this sense, the GPCR became an added catalyst in the ideological, political and organizational formation (birth?) of the Philippine new democratic movement.

GPCR ideas and principles find fertile ground in the Philippines

From an outside observer's superficial view, the impact of the GPCR on the resurgent patriotic and democratic mass movement in the Philippines in the latter half of the 1960s was manifest in a small number of student activists suddenly sporting bright red-and-gold Mao buttons, blue Mao caps and Mao jackets, with the "Little Red Book” entitled Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung conspicously jutting out of one of the pockets, chanting slogans and singing songs of apparent Chinese origin.

The Mao pins, caps, jackets and Red Books were brought home by the leading KM cadres – Jose Ma. Sison, Arthur Garcia and Charlie del Rosario – and other student leaders who had gone to China in 1967 and observed the GPCR at its height. They also brought home pamphlets, magazines and other materials on the new democratic revolution and socialist construction and revolution. One of these was a small pamphlet with five short articles – The Five Golden Rays . The pamphlets and materials contained slogans and quotations that were constantly repeated in ordinary conversation, study sessions, criticism-and-self-criticism sessions, chants during mass actions, and activist songs until eventually these became a natural part of the activists' language.

Beneath the surface, the real impact of the GPCR on the Philippine revolutionary movement was more profound. This could be measured and felt in how the ideas and principles enunciated in these materials were embraced, upheld and used as a guide by the revolutionary cadres and activists in understanding and confronting the concrete problems and issues of Philippine society and revolution. Indeed, the ground was quite fertile for the propagation and creative application of MaoZedong Thought in the Philippines in the mid-1960s. To cite some important examples:

• On classes, the class line, class struggle and the two-line struggle. Since Marxism is never taught in a serious way even in the Universities, the notion of classes, class analysis and class struggle has hitherto been vague at best, and often regarded with an anti-communist bias. With the GPCR, such slogans as "Never forget class struggle” and "Take class struggle as the key link” helped prod the Filipino activists to grasp the class line in making an objective analysis of classes in Philippine society and adopt strategy and tactics along the revolutionary class line, especially in United Front work.

• On ideological remoulding. "Serve the people” was perhaps the most resounding and oft-repeated call inspired by the GPCR during the late 1960s and well into the 1970s. Thousands of Filipino activists, mostly from the youth, wholeheartedly cast aside self-interest and ambition to become committed, "fulltime” activists "serving the people wholly and entirely”. They saw the need for and practiced criticism and self-criticism, simple living and hard struggle.

"The need for ideological struggle and ideological remoulding—this is the most important lesson from the GPCR that has served our (Philippine) movement well, and made a profound impact in forming the "core” of the mass movement,” concludes Prof. Monico Atienza, one of the students who had travelled to China in the 1960s and became a fulltime activist and cadre of the national democratic movement upon his return.

• On the correctness of armed struggle. "To rebel is justified”, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” – These are two of the best known and most often repeated quotations from the "Red Book”. Mao Zedong Thought underscored the need for armed struggle in order to overthrow the reactionary ruling system. It debunked the notion of parliamentary struggle as the main form in the struggle for genuine national freedom and democracy.

• On the mass line. "Trust the masses, rely on the masses”;”Learn from the masses”; "The people, and the people alone, are the motive forces of history” These quotations address the question, "Who are the real heroes?” and disbuse those of urban petty-bourgeois origin of the notions of superiority. Thousands of students and professionals took these slogans to heart, joined the workers in the picketlines and streamed to the countryside to live and struggle with the toiling masses and never regretted it. Moreover, the slogans underscore the need for self-reliance under conditions of relative geographic isolation and the difficulty of obtaining material support from fraternal and friendly parties.

• On militance and daring in mass struggles. "Dare to struggle, dare to win!”; (Makibaka, Huwag Matakot!) – Mass actions launched by the national democratic activists were conspicuously more militant, daring and "radical” than those of the reformist groups.

• On proletarian internationalism. "Learn from Norman Bethune!” The spirit of proletarian internationalism was constantly underscored by reference to Norman Bethune and by citing the advance and victory of the Philippine national democratic struggle as our most important contribution to the international proletarian struggle

• On the anti-revisionist line and the struggle between two lines- "Bombard the bourgeois headquarters within the party”. The GPCR alerted the Filipino activists and cadres to the importance of continuing to wage revolution to advance and consolidate socialism, combat modern revisionism and prevent capitalist restoration.

• On study and correct methods of thinking. "Reform our study!” "Oppose book worship!”, "Shoot the arrow at the target.” "One divides into two.”

Just as in China and particularly during the GPCR where abstract principles and complex ideas are distilled and concentrated into shorter, more easily digestible sentences and slogans, so too in the Philippines these slogans were more easily understood and propagated because they were simple, easy to remember, and, in the first place, appropriate and applicable.

Articles were written on the GPCR and on Mao Zedong Thought in The Activist, the publication of SCAUP, and the Philippine Collegian, the University of the Philippines student organ, and in some other school papers. .

The "Red Book” and the Five Golden Rays

The Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung and The Five Golden Rays are outstanding and indisputable examples of the extent and degree by which Mao Zedong Thought and the GPCR had impacted on the Philippine new democratic movement at its early stage of revitalization.

The pamphlet entitled The Five Golden Rays contained five short articles by Mao with a study discussion after each article. Widely reprinted and constantly read and discussed, it must have been read by each and every activist in the movement dozens of times. Since this pamphlet first appeared in the Philippines, these five articles had been incorporated in the the Basic Study Course (Araling Aktibista) for activists as well as CPP members. It can be seen from the contents of the five articles why these have served as useful guides for ideological remoulding and improving the performance of one's tasks:

• "Serve the People” (Sept 8, 1944) - commends the spirit of serving the people wholly and entirely; putting the welfare of the people above one's own self interest; remoulding oneself, ridding oneself of bourgeois ideology, embracing the proletarian standpoint; to die for the people is heavier than a mountain, to die serving the imperialists and reactionaries is as light as a feather

• "In Memory of Norman Bethune” (Dec. 31, 1939) – promotes the spirit of proletarian internationalism, high sense of responsibility, dedication to work and duty, the spirit of self-sacrifice

• "The Foolish Old Man Who Removed the Mountains” (June 11, 1945) – importance and decisiveness in persevering in the correct political line; imperialism and feudalism are the mountains that weigh heavily on the people; the masses are the "angels” who carry away the mountains.

• "Combat Liberalism” (Sept 7, 1937) – discusses the need to promote and strengthen principled unity in the organization/movement by combatting liberalism and engaging in principled ideological struggle.

• "On Correcting Mistaken Ideas Inside the Party” (December 1929) – discusses the basis for conducting criticism and self-criticism and fostering ideological remoulding; lists the common mistakes and weaknesses and how to prevent or correct these. .

The "Red Book” – Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung –- was also standard reading and discusssion material for activists from the early 1960s until the late '70s. Every cadre had a copy. There was no working or study group that didn't have at least one, since all the meetings – political, business, educational – would routinely, if not ritually, start with each member picking out a quotation and explaining its relevance to the agenda of the meeting. The discussion leader would then sum up or integrate all the points, usuallly finding the appropriate quotation or quotations from the Red Book. The use of the Red Book tapered down considerably after Lin Piao's downfall and with the official CPC exhortation to read not just the quotations from Mao but the entire articles from which the quotes were taken.

The GPCR had a particularly profound influence on the inner-Party struggle between the Soviet-leaning cadres and the cadres who had been receptive to and studied assiduously Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought, and to the re-establishment of the CPP with Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought as theoretical guide. Armando Liwanag wrote:

The inner-Party struggle revolved around the issues of Lavaite subjectivism and opportunism, and Soviet-centered modern revisionism. Inspired by the GPCR (italics mine), the proletarian revolutionary cadres held their ground even more firmly and upheld the line of Marxism-Leninism-MaoZedong Thought. It became inevitabe that in April-May 1967 the proletarian revolutionary cadres decided to leave the old CP-SP merger party and to start preparing for the re-establishment of the Communist Party of the Philippines under the theoretical guidance of Marxism-Leninism-MaoZedong thought.

Not surprisingly, after the death of Chairman Mao and the ascension to power of Deng Hsiao Ping, the attacks and revisions made by the CPC under Deng Hsiao Ping on Mao Zedong Thought gave rise or at least contributed to doubts being raised from within the national democratic forces on the correctness of the national democratic line in the Philippines. Certain elements went to the extent of rejecting and attacking the application of Mao Zedong Thought to the Philippine revolution. Thus, in the 1980s, there was a significant waning in the study and application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism within the ranks of the national democratic movement, particularly in the CPP.

Fortunately, the greater bulk of the forces remained steadfast in upholding the basic principles of the Party and the revolution, and addressed the erroneous tendencies in the Second Great Rectification Movement from 1992 to 1996. Foremost among the reaffirmed basic principles was upholding the theory of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the guide of the Philippine Revolution, the analysis of Philippine society as semifeudal and neocolonial, the correctness of the national democratic line, and the importance of the revolutionary class line.

Thus it can be said that the principles and ideas learned from the GPCR not only were reaffirmed a quarter century later, but that these ideas and principles themselves served as a powerful guide and tool in identifying the erroneous tendencies and rectifying them.

To illustrate the lasting influence of the GPCR on the new democratic or national democratic movement in the Philippines, I would like to quote from the 1996 edition of "Araling Aktibista” (Studies for Activists), the basic course being given to all members of the national democratic mass organizations all over the Philippines. The studies consist of four major parts:

I. Basic Revolutionary Attitudes and the Five Golden Rays
II. Revolutionary Study and Methods of Thinking
III. The Mass Line
IV. Democratic Centralism and the Committee System

The Introduction to Part I, Basic Revolutionary Attitudes and the Five Golden Rays reads:

Comrade Mao Zedong wrote these articles during the period when the Chinese people, under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, were waging their national democratic revolution.

In these short works, Comrade Mao clearly described the standpoint, viewpoint and methods of thinking that each revolutionary should have in order to perform one's tasks well. At the same time, he identified major non-revolutionary ideas and actions, and how these can be combatted and rectified.

Although these articles were written at different times and circumstances from 1929 to 1945, in another country, addressed to the Chinese revolutionaries waging their national democratic revolution, the lessons that can be culled from these, just like gold, do not diminish in significance and value over time, wherever they may be brought.

For the entire era of struggle of the oppressed and exploited peoples of the world against imperialism, feudalism and all reaction, the Five Golden Rays serve as a powerful guiding light for anyone who wants to remould oneself, improve the performance of one's tasks, strengthen the organization, and advance the revolution.

It is with this spirit and goal that we, Filipino revolutionaries, study these articles. We should repeatedly and tirelessly read and study the Five Golden Rays. We should strive to make this a living study by firmly relating these to our own experiences.


The Philippine revolutionary practice over the past 40 years or so indicate the validity and continuing relevance of the lessons learned from the GPCR, particularly of the principles of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as guiding theory. At the same time, it must be emphasized that the advance of the Philippine revolution owes primarily to reliance on the Filipino people and perseverance in the correct strategy, tactics, policies and methods of work borne out of a concrete analysis of concrete conditions and the creative application of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism to the Philippine situation.

This paper has presented above only a brief overview and review of some events that show the impact and influence of the GPCR on the Philippine revolution. This could however serve as a starting point for a more exhaustive and complete study that must be made to truly set the record straight.



Kislap Alitaptap




by anakngfaraon on March 6, 2009 - 1:06pm


kislap naman eh, pang-thesis yata itong reply mo!


sige na nga, babasahin na nang maintindihan!



by kislapalitaptap on March 6, 2009 - 1:12pm

...sowee...ito kasi yung ibinigay na link sakin nung kakilala kong tibak eh.

mukhang mabigat nga...hahaha!

Kislap Alitaptap




by diwa on March 6, 2009 - 1:16pm

hindi ka na lang naglagay ng link kislap. mas mahaba pa ang post mo kaysa sa mismong artikulo dito a. : )

by kislapalitaptap on March 6, 2009 - 1:22pm

oo nga noh!


Kislap Alitaptap




by diwa on March 6, 2009 - 1:07pm

tulad na lang ng binaggit ni kislapalitaptap sa taas, ang panagbenga. galing ito sa salitang kankanae, isang tribo sa Cordillera. isa itong pagdiriwang sa panahon ng pamumulaklak na nangangahulugan ng pagsisimula ulit ng buhay para sa kanila. kung makakapunta ka sa Cordillera at masasaksihan mo ang ilan pang nalalabing tradisyunal na seremonya nila, makikita mo ang napakalaking kaibahan na ng selebrasyon ngayon ng panagbenga na puno na ng tao, may parada ng malalaking float na may mga ads pa ng iba't ibang produkto at lulan ang mga sikat na artista.

at karamihan sa malalaking pista sa Pilipinas, ganito na ang masasaksihan mo. sa esensya, ginagamit ang mga tradisyong ito para ilako at maglako ng iba pang produkto, at nawawala na ang dating kahulugan kung bakit isinasagawa ang mga ito.

by anakngfaraon on March 6, 2009 - 1:43pm


sa mga pistang ganyan, siguro pinapasok na rin ng ads dahil na rin sa kagustuhan ng organizers na kumita either para maibulsa or pwede rin namang para mas mapaganda pa ang pista.  (panghila ng mga local/foreign tourists)

gusto na rin kasi ng mga tao ngayon yung may mga artista sa piyesta at pera ang kailangan para sa mga bagay na ganyan.  (Kita ko sa news na may mga taartits sa panagbenga). kung nanaisin naman ng mga tao or organizers, pwede namang tanggihan ang advertisers (dahil pinagbawal nga ang banners ng mga politiko sa panagbenga di ba), kaya lang 'di ko alam kung magiging kasing garbo. 


kung kaninong kasalanan - hindi lang siguro sa mga malalaking bansa kundi yung maliliit na bansa na naga-allow na mahaluan ang kultura nila.  sa bansa natin na mahilig ang mga tao sa imported, madali nga tayong mahaluan.


consequently, dito sa US, ang daming pinoy communities na nagsusumikap i-promote ang kultura natin.  may mga pinoy cultural groups nga dito na may mga members na ibang lahi - biruin mo, amerikanong kumakanta ng kundiman!



by diwa on March 6, 2009 - 1:59pm

iyon nga ang mismong mali. nagiging kalakal na lang ang kultura, tulad ng lahat ng bagay. kailangan mas magarbo kaysa nakaraan, kailangan mas maraming gimik, atbp. kasi para kumita. nawala na ang talagang esensya ng pagdiriwang. Halimbawa ang maraming pista ng patron ng iba't ibang lugar, mula religious practice ng mga deboto, nagiging parang perya na.

ngayon, tama ka na nasa tao ang ganoong kaisipan, pero ang tanong, sino bang nagsaksak sa utak nila iyon? doon pumapasok ang papel ng mga colonizers. at sa globalisasyon, lalong tumindi ang atakeng iyon.

by anakngfaraon on March 6, 2009 - 2:48pm


natural na inclination ang improvement - ang pagandahin pa - ang pagarbohin pa.  kahit sa sariling buhay,  ang hangad ng karamihan ay mapabuti ang kasalukuyang kalagayan. 

kung talagang nadi-"dilute" na ang ating kultura dala ng globalisasyon, siguro nagkakaganon dahil hindi aware ang mga tao. (nakakatulong ang mga artikulong gaya nito sa pamamahagi ng impormasyon). 


hindi naman masama ang pag-unlad, at sa pag-unlad talagang may mga bagay na nasasakripisyo.  kailangan lang pag-isipan kung ano ang mas mahalaga at kung worth it ang sakripisyo.  no use pointing fingers at this moment kasi hindi mo na mapipigilan ang globalisasyon.  gumawa na lang ng paraan upang ma-preserve ang ating kultura. 



by diwa on March 6, 2009 - 4:32pm

ang epekto ng globalisasyon sa kultura ay hindi pag-unlad na pagbabago. nagiging pretext lang ang pagpapaganda, pero sa likod niyon, commodification talaga. isipin mo na lang, ang relihiyon mo, nilagyan ng tag prize. ganoon ang masamang epekto nito.

by noelbarcelona on March 6, 2009 - 9:00pm

I didn't know that this article would create such a fuzz. 

Anyways, there is a grave misunderstanding about the term "internationalization" of culture and globalization. Globalization is actually an economic term, used in the early 60's (If my recollection is right) to prepare the economies of much aggressive marketing of anything marketable. 

Meaning, globalization is the more liberalization of trade and services. This was created by supereconomic powers, esp. the United States of America to be able to expand their market of surplus products and to speed up the disposal of these goods to the "new markets" which are the underdeveloped nations like the Philippines that has no capacity to create their own technology.

They have included cultural products such as literature, art works, music and all, in order to expose beauty; of course, this is superficial.

The influx of "modern" culture, which is the Western culture, was made possible by using massively the media technology such radio, newspapers, television, and now the Internet.

Schiller observed that, the US has aggressively used the media in order to propagate misconceptions and misguidance on culture and have enforced, in full power, the ideas of a "better culture" which is the American culture. 

Due this, the hegemony took place. By "modernizing" every aspect of culture and by bombarding the public or the common masa the idea of a "better culture," a more scientific and a more appropriate one, the death of the indigenous cultures become sudden. 

But much worse is this: The commodification of culture does not stop in selling festivities, crafts, music and indigenous writings but in "preservation" and "conservation" movements in arts and cultures.

Since the international funding agencies are one way and another, linked to imperialist powers, such as US Aid, Asian Development Bank, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, they have in one way, have made the cultural preservation and empowerment movement just for a show and that some non-governmental and even governmental organizations, become lucrative business for others.

Poor Philippines! Poor world! Down with imperialism!


Que sera, sera


by anakngfaraon on March 7, 2009 - 3:18am


wala akong sinabi na pag-unlad ang epekto sa kultura ng globalisasyon.  ang sinasabi ko hindi masama ang pag-unlad - kung titignan ang globalisasyon in terms of economics, ikaw mismo may magandang nakuha dito - mula sa computer na iyong ginagamit, hanggang sa internet, hanggang sa camera na ginamit mo upang piktyuran ang magaganda mong mata - lahat iyan parte ng globalisasyon.  pati na rin ang pagtratrabaho ng mga kababayan natin sa ibang bansa bilang mga OFW upang mapakain ang kanilang pamilya ay parte ng globalisasyon. 

ngayon yung tungkol sa dilution ng kultura gawa ng globalisasyon, nasa atin ang desisyon at ang aksyong kailangan upang ma-preserve ang mga ito.  ang problema, iilan lang ang aware sa ganito. lumaki ang karaniwang pinoy na may influx ng western/foreign culture - sa mga babasahin, sa musika, sa mga palabas sa tv, sa mga gamit, etc.  masyadong intertwined sa araw-araw nating pamumuhay kaya't mahirap ma-realize na "diluted" na pala tayo. at gaya rin ng una kong sinabi, dito nga mismo sa US ay may Pinoy groups na ipino-promote ang kulturang Pinoy, and you have to realize that it's more challenging here.  pero nagagawa nila.  so dapat sa mismong bansa natin, kaya ring gawin na mai-preserve ang maganda nating kultura.    

wala po akong relihiyon at di ko naiintindihan ang ibig mong sabihin ng paglagay ng prize tag dito. 

good day!



by diwa on March 7, 2009 - 6:59am

well, ok. mukha namang wala tayong pinagtatalunan kaugnay sa kultura. pero gusto ko lang ilinaw na sa kahit na anong bagay hindi ko pasasalamatan ang globalisasyon. di baleng wala akong kompyuter ngayon kung magiging malaya lamang tayo sa impe. hindi ba kung hindi naman tayo kontrolado, hindi tayo mapipigilan sa industriyalisasyon, edi nakagawa na rin sana tayo ng sariling kompyuter. o kahit pa hindi makagawa ng sarili dahil hindi pa umabot sa ganoong antas, at least, magiging mas patas sana ang katayuan kapag nakikipagpalitan.

by isangsakongtubig on March 7, 2009 - 10:07am


 pakiramdam ko pride lang yang nasa sayo e. 





kung hindi ka babalik, araw araw na lang akong maghihintay

by j luna on March 7, 2009 - 4:13pm

MAy isa pang nakakatakot na ginagawa ang globalization.

Isa dito ay ang pinapanatili o pinepreserve ng isang imperyalistang bansa ang pagiging piyudal ng isang bansang kinukuhanan nila ng raw materials.

Dahil sa pagnanais na wag mawalan ng huthutan ng raw material at cheap labor sa mga taniman nila, hangga't maaari ay gagawin nila ang lahat upang patayin ang anumang ideyolohiyang makakapagpa-abante sa mga masang pisante.

Ang piyudal na pag-iisip at kultura kasi ay malaki ang takot sa mga panginoong may lupa....

Halimbawa ang isang mayamang bansa ay malaki ang demand sa mga materyales na sa third world lang makukuha at nagma-may-ari din sila ng mga bulakan, tubuhan o sagingan sa isang third world na bansa (halimbawa), upang manatili ang supply nila ng bulak,tubo o saging, hangga't maaari ay pipilitin ng imperyalista na wag makatakas sa pagkapiyudal ang bansang hinihigupan nila ng dugo. Once na mamulat kasi ang mga host ng mga parasite na ito, maaari silang umabante at lumaban. Maaari silang mawalan ng source ng raw materials kung magkakaganun... Kaya, tignan natin ang ilang bansa sa central america at south america...Hanggang ngayon mas piyudal pa kesa sa pinaka-piyudal na lugar dito sa pinas.

Medyo out of topic pero swak parin sa isyu ng globalisasyon.

Let's Lynch The Landlord
-Jello Biafra

Eto medyo pasok sa topic.....

Pano ang mga lumad na nawawalan ng tirahan sa mga gubat at kabundukan na kinakamkam ng mga imperyalista sa ngalan ng globalisasyon?

Kung ang kanilang kultura, uri ng pamumuhay at sining ay naka-ugat sa kanilang lupang tinitirhan, ano ang mangyayari sa kultura nila pag narelocate o kung mawawala sila sa lupa nila?

http://www.dagangkanal.blogspot.com changes lives!

by diwa on March 9, 2009 - 6:45pm

actually, swak na swak ito. dapat nga, pinag-isa na lang ang dalawang post dito kaugnay ng globalisasyon. dahil ang economic aspect talaga ng globalisasyon ang tuntungan ng iba pang epekto nito sa iba pang larangan. ito ang nagtatakda at pangunahin. kaya nga marami ang hindi nakakaintindi sa epekto nito sa kultura, kasi iyong mismong esensya nito ang hindi naiintindihan.

by j luna on March 9, 2009 - 7:06pm

Yun nga e di ba? Kambal ang ekonomiks sa kultura...

OO nga pala, ang kultura ng lumad ay nakadikit sa lupang tinitirikan ng kanilang lahi at pinaglilibingan ng kanilang mga ninuno...

Once na maalis sila dito, dahil sa mga proyekto ng mga kapitalista at imperyalista...pinutol na rin ang kanilang ugat...

kahit sabihing ililipat sila sa isang lugar na pwede nilang tirhan at gagamitin ang kultura nila sa reserve o parkeng paglilipatan...iba na yun...

bukod pa dito, bastardized din sila lalo na kung ililipat sila sa parke ng DOT...dahil ang kultura nila at sining ay para sa kanila at hindi para sa mga turista at para pagkakitahan.

Ang globalisation din ang dahilan kung bakit nananatili ang mga hacienda...at sa tingin ko rin ang mga industrial economic zone ay ang bagong hacienda kung saan nagaganap ang bagong uri ng pang-aabuso.

http://www.dagangkanal.blogspot.com changes lives!

by diwa on March 9, 2009 - 7:40pm

Well, hindi na maituturing na hacienda ang mga eco zones. kapag hacienda kasi, mga magsasaka ang pwersa at pinagsasamantalahan. sa mga industrial zones, mga pabrika na ang makikita at sa loob ang mga manggagawa. Sa una, pyudal ang relasyon, sa pangalawa, kapitalistang produksyon ang umiiral. pero magkaugnay pa rin naman ang dalawa. ang una, kailangan nila para sa mga hilaw na materyales, ang pangalawa, para sa mga semi-manufactures.

by j luna on March 9, 2009 - 7:53pm

Kaya ko ginamit ang paghahambing ay di upang tukuyin ang mode of production ngunit upang ipakita ang pang-aabuso sa manggagawa ng maga nagmamay-ari ng kumpanya na (mga kapitalista)

Malinaw naman sa akin ang kuneksyon ng industriyal at kapitalistang estado ( Manggagawa vs Kapitalista)

at ng piyudal na konsepto ng hacienda (pisante vs panginoong maylupa)

mali lang talaga ang nagamit kong figure of speech. pasensiya na.
http://www.dagangkanal.blogspot.com changes lives!

by diwa on March 9, 2009 - 8:56pm

ah, ok lang.