General Macario Sakay – Was He an Outlaw or a Patriot?


General Macario Sakay y de Leon was born on Mar. 1, 1878, along Tabora Street in Tondo, Manila. and died 114 years ago today on Sept. 13, 1907, at age 29. He first worked as an apprentice in a kalesa (carriage) manufacturing shop. He was also a tailor, a barber, and a stage actor.

Sakay grew up in Tondo, where he had gotton to know Andres Bonifacio. Joining the Katipunan in 1894, Sakay acted in popular Tagalog verse dramas, which were staged in different neighborhoods in Manila, thus providing the perfect cover for the young Katipunero to move about. He fought alongside Bonifacio as a Filipino general in the 1896 Philippine Revolution against Spain. In 1899, he continued the struggle for Philippine independence against the United States.

The Philippine-American War, also called the Philippine Insurrection by the United States, was a war fought from 1899 to 1902 by forces of…

View original post 1,418 more words

Overhauling the Philippine Education System


IF I WERE THE NEXT PRESIDENT(Part 6 of a series)


Founder, Buklod National Political Party

There is a common acknowledgement that the quality of our education system is quite low. This observation, without doubt, has been validated by the poor results of the performance of our students in periodic international assessments of achieved learning.

The most telling of these assessments is the very poor performance of our students in PISA (Programme for International Assessment) in 2018 for 15 year-olds where our students ranked lowest in reading and second lowest in mathematics and science, out of 79 countries. A humiliating results, indeed; but which brought a loud and clear confirmation that may drive us to action. Similarly, we did poorly in the ASEAN assessment in 2019 of Grade 5 students among six ASEAN countries.

In addition to the academic issue, the term I use to…

View original post 1,230 more words

Letter XIII Latrines

With all the sad news around, here is a snippet of the army life which might make you smile a little.

Pacific Paratrooper

High class facilities in the Philippines, 1944

Back in the states, people were still dancing to the tunes of The Dorsey Brothers, Count Basie and Artie Shaw.  They listened to the songs of Doris Day, the Andrew Sisters, Lena Horne and Rosemary Clooney.  But, some others weren’t so lucky, in the army there was always latrine duty, as depicted in the following letter from Smitty.


Letter XIII                               Latrines                        Wednesday 9/5/44

Dear Mom,

Many are the times you have heard me refer to the latrines.  Never before had I any conception or realized the amount of genius and mathematical figuring that was necessary for the building of one of these casual looking comfort stations.

Yesterday I had the dubious honor of being selected, with four other disgruntled G.I.s, to labor on a detail whose sole aim and mission was the digging and building of a latrine.  It seems that in order…

View original post 1,312 more words

Encomienda in the Philippines


Encomienda Drawing by Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayala

An encomienda was a system adopted in all the Spanish colonies based upon the practice of exacting tribute from Muslims and Jews during the Reconquista (Reconquest) of Muslim Spain. As legally defined in 1503, encomiendas (the term comes from Spanish encomendar, “to entrust”) were used to reward the long, loyal, or hazardous service to the Crown by military men who had participated in the conquest, mostly soldiers with Sargento mayor rank or above. It was also used to recognize and perpetuate Spanish class distinction in Asia. The receiver of the reward, the encomendero, was charged with a number of “Indios” living within a specific geographic area he was supposed to instruct in the Catholic faith and the Spanish language. The law limited the number of natives in an area to not more than 300, and the land value was limited to…

View original post 1,206 more words



IF I WERE THE NEXT PRESIDENT(Part 5 of a series)


Founder, Buklod National Political Party

A heartbreaking face of poverty is the present-day preponderance of undernutrition of Filipino young children.

The leading single measure of this undernutrition, or malnutrition generally, is stunting—the health condition of children under five years old of having a height shorter, as defined, than the median of a reference population, which in our case is the Philippine population. Stunting is associated with the consequences of malnutrition, including brain underdevelopment.

The consequences of stunting are devastating—poor performance in school and low productivity as adults. The gravity of this health condition is further illustrated in a recent World Bank report on undernutrition in the Philippines. The report states that normal height growth and brain development not achieved during the first 1,000 days of a child’s life from conception (about two years…

View original post 1,013 more words

FDR’s New Deal and Sanders’ 3.5 Trillion Spending Spree

Your thoughts?

According to Washington Post today, “Bernie Sanders is on the cusp of leaving an indelible mark on the federal government, having shepherded a $3.5 trillion spending blueprint through the Senate this week. The legislation, backed by President Biden and Democratic congressional leaders, sets the stage for the most significant expansion of the federal social safety net in generations and the largest government response to climate change ever mounted. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called the pending legislation – which could include free community college, paid family and medical leave, universal pre-K, vast clean energy investments, and the largest-ever proposed expansion of Medicare – a reckless taxing-and-spending spree that was authored by our self-described socialist colleague.”

Senator Schumer said, “The Democratic budget will be the most significant legislation for American families since the era of the New Deal and the Great Society. It is big, bold change — the kind of change America thirsts for.”

I’m afraid I have to disagree with Senator Schumer. It will bankrupt the country and burden the future generation with huge taxes and insurmountable national debt. Do we want that for our children and grandchildren?

The American people should go back in history and learn about FDR and the New Deal, which created the Great Depression. Are we going back to the same worst era of our history?

In 1932 Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt defeated Hoover in a landslide. Along with Washington and Lincoln, FDR is routinely listed in polls as among the “great” presidents. Many Americans believe his New Deal programs rescued the country from the grips of the Depression. In fact, under FDR, unemployment averaged a whopping 18 percent from 1933 to 1940.

One biographer said that there was no one more ignorant of economics than FDR. It showed. FDR knew nothing about how wealth was created. The legislation he called for was a patchwork of absurdities, sometimes at odds with each other and sometimes even at odds with themselves.

The National Industrial Recovery Act (NRA), which established the National Recovery Administration, was an enormous contradiction. On the one hand, it sought to keep wage rates high to give the consumer greater “purchasing power.” On the other hand, it established hundreds of legally sanctioned, industry-wide cartels that were allowed to establish standard wages, hours of operation, and minimum prices. The minimum prices meant businesses would be prevented mainly from underselling each other; everyone’s price had to be at least the prescribed minimum. The artificially high wages meant continuing unemployment, and the high prices meant hardship for nearly all Americans.

FDR’s agricultural policies were in a class of genius all their own. Not content with setting high prices for other goods, FDR moved on to food. He proposed to pay farmers for cutting back on production or producing nothing at all. The decrease in supply, he believed, would raise farm prices. But in the meantime, he had to deal with the existing bounty. The administration decided to destroy much of what had already been produced to create a shortage and thereby raise farm prices. Six million pigs were slaughtered, and ten million acres of cotton were destroyed.

The New Deal labor laws and the increased labor cost associated with Social Security further contributed to the unemployment problem to the tune of an additional 1.2 million unemployed by 1938, according to economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Gallaway. Unsure of what the federal government would do next and what other punitive measures would be imposed on them, businessmen and investors stopped investing. Businessmen took seriously the various ravings of the anti-business zealots who occupied the White House. Sounds familiar?

FDR gave a tremendous boost to organized labor with the National Labor Relations Act, better known as the Wagner Act of 1935. The standard textbook takes for granted that what is good for unions is good for workers (even though the whole purpose of a modern union is to exclude people from a trade in order to raise the wages of union workers). The fact says otherwise. The ways in which labor unions impoverish the society are legion, from distortions in the labor market to work rules that discourage efficiency and innovation.

The New Deal’s admirers assure us that FDR’s massive spending projects provided jobs and economic stimulus. But such jobs are funded by taking money from some people (taxpayers) and giving it to others, so there is no net stimulus. In fact, such programs are positively bad in that they divert capital from the private sector and inhibit healthy job creation. The various public works programs that FDR established and the billions of dollars he devoted to them only dried up capital in favor of government projects that were inherently wasteful since they lack the kind of profit-and-loss test that guides entrepreneurs in their investment decision.

FDR’s public-works projects were rife with corruption. Economic historians have been at pains to account for the distribution of these projects around the country – why, for example, did the South, where people were the poorest, receive the least assistance from FDR’s Works Progress Administration (WPA)? Several scholars, noting the rather curious preponderance of WPA projects in western states where FDR’s electoral margin had been thin in 1932, believe political considerations played an important role in how these projects were distributed. In other words, FDR was buying votes with make-work jobs.

WPA workers were often pressured to support FDR’s favored candidates, change their party affiliations, or “contribute” to FDRs’re-election campaign to remain employed. Registered Republicans on relief rolls were demanded to register as Democrats in order to keep their jobs.

This was by no means the only example of political intimidation that occurred during the FDR years. The standard textbook provides all the details of Watergate and Richard Nixon’s abuse of power (as indeed it should) but not a word about FDR as the pioneer of this activity.

“Why do the Democrats get away with anything?” one might ask. It is time we educate ourselves and voice our opinion to members of Congress.


Washington Post article – Aug. 12, 2021

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History – Thomas E. Woods, Jr. Ph.D.

An Easy-Care Rose (Knock Out) and a Motivational Tip for a Memorable Life

Stop and Smell the Roses - Stay Healthy and Stress Free

Knock Out® Roses, the easy-care roses hybridized by Wisconsin-born William J. (Bill) Radler, won the All-American Rose Selection (AARS) award in 2000. The Knock Out® Rose, Radler’s first commercial success, has broken all records for sales of a new rose. Today, the Knock Out® Rose is the most widely sold rose in North America.

The Knock Out® Family of Roses is highly disease-resistant roses, easy to grow and bloom repeatedly and profusely from spring until frost with healthy foliage that does not need the chemical spray program. Blooms are fire engine red in cool weather and cherry red in the summer months. The foliage is dark green and leathery with a burgundy hue. They are low-maintenance roses with a bloom cycle of about every 5-6 weeks and continue until the first hard frost. All of the Knock Out® Roses are self-cleaning, so there is no need…

View original post 282 more words

Solving the problem of homelessness


IF I WERE THE NEXT PRESIDENT(Part 4 of a series)


Founder, Buklod National Political Party

The present widespread presence of homeless and informal settlers in our society is another tormenting face of dehumanizing poverty in our country.Improving their current condition clearly needs direct government intervention.Otherwise, this problem will persist for a long time. The normal course of events cannot make it disappear or even mitigate it to any reasonable extent.

Current available information about the homeless and informal settlers appears to be incomplete and dated. As such, these data may not give a reasonable measure of the scope of these two problems. Nevertheless, these may be helpful in providing an indication of the government assistance needed to deal effectively with these serious and utterly degrading human problem.

A summary brief prepared by an American public policy advocate entity in July 2020 indicates that…

View original post 1,685 more words

General Miguel Malvar and the Philippine Revolution – Conclusion


On February 23, General Antonio Luna needed Malvar and his unit to participate in a Filipino counterattack planned to regain ground lost earlier by Filipinos and capture Manila. However, the Filipino offensive collapsed.

Early U.S. Operations in Southern Tagalog Region

In mid-March, an expeditionary force under Brig. Gen. Loyd Wheaton moved eastward, clearing Filipino troops from the vicinity of the Pasig River, assuring the Americans of riverine access to Laguna de Bay. About a month later, Major Gen. Henry Lawton led an expedition to Santa Cruz on the eastern shore of Laguna de Bay, where the Filipinos had a large concentration of troops. Lawton’s force engaged the enemy several times, occupied Santa Cruz briefly, reconnoitered the area, and then returned to Manila. The foray by Lawton caused great concern to the Filipino high command, for it seemed to presage the onset of a major American campaign in southern Luzon.


View original post 972 more words

Critical Race Theory: What is it?

By: Christopher F. Rufo, Founder and Director, Battlefront

Reprinted by permission from Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College.

Critical Race Theory is fast becoming America’s new institutional orthodoxy. Yet most Americans have never heard of it – and of those who have, many don’t understand it. It’s time for this to change. We need to know what it is so we can know how to fight it.

In explaining critical race theory, it helps to begin with a brief history of Marxism. Originally, the Marxist Left built its political program on the theory of class conflict. Marx believed that the primary characteristic of industrial societies was the imbalance of power between capitalists and workers. The solution to that imbalance, according to Marx, was revolution: the workers would eventually gain consciousness of their plight, seize the means of production, overthrow the capitalist class, and usher in a new socialist society.

During the 20th century, a number of regimes underwent Marxist-style revolutions, and each ended in disaster. Socialist governments in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba, and elsewhere racked up a body count of nearly 100 million of their own people. They are remembered for their gulags, show trials, executions, and mass starvations. In practice, Marx’s ideas unleashed man’s darkest brutalities.

By the mid-1960s, Marxist intellectuals in the West had begun to acknowledge these failures. They recoiled at revelations of Soviet atrocities and came to realize that workers’ revolutions would never occur in Western Europe or the United States, where there were large middle classes and rapidly improving standards of living. American in particular had never developed a sense of class consciousness or class division. Most Americans believed in the American dream – the idea that they could transcend their origins through education, hard work, and good citizenship.

But rather than abandon their Leftist political project, Marxist scholars in the West simply adapted their revolutionary theory to the social and racial unrest of the 1960s. Abandoning Marx’s economic dialectic of capitalist and workers, they substituted race for class and sought to create a revolutionary coalition of the dispossessed based on racial and ethnic categories.

Fortunately, the early proponents of this revolutionary coalition in the U.S. lost out in the 1960s to the civil rights movement, which sought instead the fulfillment of the American promise of freedom and equality under the law. Americans preferred the idea of improving their country to that of overthrowing it. The vision of Martin Luther King, Jr., President Johnson’s pursuit of the Great Society, and the restoration of law and order promised by President Nixon in his 1968 campaign defined the post 1960s American political consensus.

But the radical Left has proved resilient and enduring – which is where critical race theory comes in.


Critical race theory is an academic discipline, formulated in the 1990s, built on the intellectual framework of identity-based Marxism. Relegated for many years to universities and obscure academic journals, over the past decade it has increasingly become the default ideology in our public institutions. It has been injected into government agencies, public school systems, teacher training programs, and corporate human resources departments in the form of diversity training programs, human resources modules, public policy frameworks, and school curricula.

There are a series of euphemisms deployed by its supporters to describe critical race theory, including “equity,” “social justice,” “diversity and inclusion,” and “culturally responsive teaching.” Critical race theorists, masters of language construction, realize that “neoMarxism” would be a hard sell. Equity, on the other hand, sounds non-threatening and is easily confused with the American principle of equality. But the distinction is vast and important. Indeed, equality – the principle proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, defended in the Civil War, and codified into law with the 14th and 15th Amendments, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 – is explicitly rejected by critical race theorists. To them, equality represents “mere nondiscrimination” and provides “camouflage” for white supremacy, patriarchy, and oppression.

In contrast to equality, equity as defined and promoted by critical race theorists is little more than reformulated Marxism. In the name of equity, UCLA Law Professor and critical race theorist Cheryl Harris has proposed suspending private property rights, seizing land and wealth and redistributing them along racial lines. Critical race guru Ibram X. Kendi, who directs the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University, has proposed the creation of a federal Department of Antiracism. This department would be independent of (i.e., unaccountable to) the elected branches of government, and would have the power to nullify, veto, or abolish any law at any level of government and curtail the speech of political leaders and others who are deemed insufficiently “antiracist.”

One practical result of the creation of such a department would be the overthrow of capitalism, since according to Kendi, “In order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anti-capitalist.” In other words, identity is the means and Marxism is the end.

An equity-based form of government would mean the end not only of private property, but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism, and freedom of speech. These would be replaced by race-based redistribution of wealth, group-based rights, active discrimination, and omnipotent bureaucratic authority. Historically, the accusation of “anti-Americanism” has been overused. But in this case, it’s not a matter of interpretation – critical race theory prescribes a revolutionary program that would overturn the principles of the Declaration and destroy the remaining structure of the Constitution.