#5 Constantino and Glenn May, meaning of nationalism, critique of Glenn May, Past Revisited, Past

Distorted

Constatino’s brand of nationalism: To take charge of our own destiny, to be free from neo-colonialism
and from all vestiges of formal colonialism, to take pride in our historical heritage.

** HIS MESSAGE WAS: Filipino resistance to colonial oppression was the unifying thread of Philippine
history.

“The only way a history of the Philippines can be Filipino is to write on the basis of the struggles of the
people, for in these struggles the Filipino emerged.”

“They [some scholars] failed to perceive that to give history a nationalist perspective the role some of
these men [recognized heroes and idealized national leaders] played should have been critically
scrutinized and evaluated. The failure to do this had the effect—perhaps unintended but none
the less unfortunate—of propagating other myths and abetting the illusion that history is the
work of heroes and great men.”

**Constantino believes that beyond writing Philippine history from the point of view of the Filipino,
the task is to advance to the writing of a true Filipino history, the history of the Filipino people.
He believes that people, as associated, is in constant struggle in order to realize their human
potential for the human being. History, then, is the recorded struggle of people. It is consists of
the people’s efforts to attain a better life. And so, A PAST REVISITED was conceived to give us a
better understanding of the reality and which can guide us to higher forms of struggle for the
people’s cause. A people’s history thus unifies past with present experience. (and the real
historian deals primarily with common people)

GLENN MAY’s REBUTTALS

1. A PAST REVISITED is mixture of advocacy and propaganda. Constantino is not calling historians
to think critically; he is calling on them to criticize in favor of the common people which he place
in a glorified position being “true nationalists” and above criticism; He is anti-elitist and his book
is a call for mass struggle.
2. It is not true that the revolution was a “mass movement”.
a. He didn’t acknowledge the possibility that the Filipino elites might have mobilized their
clients to throw out the Spaniards and might therefore have responsible for the
widespread support for the Revolution
b. His assertions about the attitudes of the masses are not based on a single shred of
evidence
3. Constantino distorted and invented a version of the past. He distorted the dynamics of
American imperialism. COnstantino has a habit of criticizing Americans for the things that they
did not do.
4. Constantino’s brand of Nationalism in A PAST REVISITED (was salutary but) was built in shaky
foundations.
a. Vague/ Less pedagogical purpose
b. Violates every canon of historical scholarship