Echoes of a Lost Manila: Nostalgia, Heritage, and the Complexities of Urban Restoration

Echoes of a Lost Manila: Nostalgia, Heritage, 

and the Complexities of Urban Restoration

The transformation of Manila over the course of the 20th and 21st centuries—from a flourishing colonial hub to a sprawling, modern metropolis—has been shaped by a complex interplay of historical events, socio-political forces, and urban development. This transformation, while emblematic of the nation’s progress, also brings with it a sense of loss. The nostalgic longing for the Manila of old, particularly its pre-war incarnation, has persisted in the collective memory of many Filipinos, alongside the harsh reality of a city that continues to be reshaped by forces of globalization, rapid urbanization, and modern economic priorities. 

Old Manila, as it existed before World War II, was a city rich in history and architectural splendor—a vivid tapestry of Spanish colonial influences, art deco design, and early 20th-century grandeur. Its wide boulevards, stately mansions, and historic churches offered a glimpse into the city’s imperial past, while its bustling markets and vibrant streets reflected a diverse and dynamic urban life. But the ravages of war, combined with the country’s shift toward modernization, left much of this heritage in ruins. Today, the idea of restoring Old Manila, or at least a vision of it, exists as a powerful “what if,” a longing for a past that can never truly be recaptured. 

This essay explores the complexities of this nostalgia—what it means to long for a lost city, the challenges of reconciling heritage preservation with the pressures of urban development, and the realities of what could have been had Old Manila been spared the destructive forces of war and modernization. Through a critical examination of Manila’s urban history and its relationship with heritage, we will also explore the broader implications of the city’s architectural erasure, the rise of globalized cities, and the tension between preservation and progress. 

Nostalgia and the Imagined Past 

Nostalgia, as both a sentiment and a cultural force, plays a central role in the longing for a restored Old Manila. This nostalgia is not simply about a desire for a return to a specific historical moment; it is deeply tied to the emotional and cultural connections that Filipinos have with their city’s past. For many, the pre-war Manila symbolizes a golden age of prosperity, a time when the city was not only the capital of the Philippines but also a vibrant cultural and economic center of the broader Asia-Pacific region. The “what if” scenarios of this lost Manila are alive in the imagination of those who remember the stories of their parents and grandparents or those who have only encountered Manila through photographs, literature, and film. These imagined visions of the past fuel a desire to bring back the city’s former grandeur, even if it exists only in the collective mind. 

The power of this nostalgia is also evident in the way Manila’s heritage is often framed. Cities like Dhaka, Calcutta, and Bombay—often referred to as the “forgotten corners” of the developing world—serve as examples of places where colonial-era architecture and historic streetscapes still coexist with the modern, chaotic life of urban centers. In these cities, the old and the new are interwoven, and the past is not relegated to dusty archives but is allowed to live and breathe in the present. Manila’s lost heritage, in this light, appears as a tragic absence—an opportunity missed in the pursuit of progress and economic development. 

However, nostalgia alone cannot drive the restoration of a city. It is essential to recognize that the very nature of this nostalgia is rooted in an idealized version of the past, one that may not fully acknowledge the complexities or contradictions of that period. The Old Manila of pre-war days was not without its social inequalities, political struggles, and colonial legacies. To restore Old Manila would not simply mean recreating the aesthetic beauty of the past, but engaging with the historical, political, and cultural narratives that shaped it. This is where the real challenge of restoration lies: how to reconcile a romanticized past with the diverse and often contentious realities of the present. 

The Rise of Urbanization and the Erasure of Heritage 

The historical trajectory that led to the erasure of Old Manila is deeply tied to the rapid processes of urbanization and modernization that followed World War II. The war itself left an indelible mark on the city, as much of Manila’s architectural heritage was destroyed in the Battle of Manila in 1945. The post-war reconstruction efforts prioritized rebuilding the city’s infrastructure and economy, often at the cost of preserving its historic structures. The push for modernity and industrialization, in line with global trends, led to the demolition of colonial-era buildings in favor of new, more “efficient” structures designed to cater to the needs of a growing urban population. 

This erasure of heritage is not unique to Manila. It reflects a broader trend in many global cities where modernization often leads to the destruction of historical sites and buildings. Cities like Singapore, for example, initially embraced large-scale demolition and redevelopment in the mid-20th century as part of its quest to transform itself into a modern metropolis. However, Singapore later experienced a shift in its approach to urban planning. Recognizing the cultural and economic value of its heritage, the city began efforts to preserve and restore many of its historic buildings, incorporating them into the urban fabric alongside the new skyscrapers and commercial districts that defined its modern identity. 

The case of Singapore highlights an important lesson: that heritage is not static. The past cannot be preserved in isolation; it must be integrated into the present and future of a city. Yet in Manila, this realization has been slow to take hold. The city continues to grapple with the tension between economic growth and cultural preservation. The erasure of Old Manila is not simply a consequence of historical events; it is a reflection of a broader societal mindset that often prioritizes short-term economic gains over long-term cultural value. 

The Challenges of Restoration: A Vision of What Could Have Been 

The question of restoring Old Manila, or at least recreating elements of it, brings us to the broader issue of what could have been—had the city been preserved before the ravages of war and the waves of modernization. What would Manila look like today if the grand homes of Escolta, the stately churches, and the intricate details of pre-war Spanish architecture had been kept intact? Would it resemble more closely the bustling colonial districts of Dhaka, Calcutta, or Bombay, where the old and the new coexist in a sometimes uneasy but always vibrant relationship? 

Restoring Old Manila is not just about reconstructing buildings or recreating old streetscapes. It is about creating a space where history is not confined to museums or historical markers, but is allowed to flourish in the lived experience of the city’s residents. This would require a shift in how heritage is perceived—not as a relic to be admired from afar but as a living part of the city’s identity. It would require investment in preservation efforts, both in terms of physical infrastructure and in fostering a cultural awareness of the value of heritage. Most importantly, it would require a collective will to balance the pressures of modernization with the need to honor the city’s past. 

But perhaps more than anything, the restoration of Old Manila is an exercise in reconciling the past with the future. It is about finding a way to incorporate heritage into the evolving landscape of the city, creating a Manila that is both rooted in its history and forward-looking in its development. This task is undoubtedly complex, and the path forward is unclear. Yet the dream of Old Manila, like the echoes of its lost streets, remains a powerful symbol of a city’s potential—a city that could have been but is not yet lost. 

Conclusion: Beyond the Ruins—Reimagining a Future 

In conclusion, the restoration of Old Manila is not simply a nostalgic desire to return to the past but a call to reimagine the city’s future in dialogue with its history. While the loss of Old Manila is irreversible, the lessons of its erasure should guide future efforts to preserve heritage in the face of urbanization. The question is not whether the past can be recreated, but how the city can embrace its cultural heritage as a vital part of its modern identity. As Manila continues to evolve, there is still hope that the echoes of its lost heritage can resonate in new and meaningful ways, shaping a future that honors its rich history while welcoming the possibilities of the present and the future. 

When China’s own AI work brought disruption, fame, and concern

When China’s own Artificial Intelligence work
brought disruption, fame, and concern

The Artificial Intelligence (AI) industry has been undergoing a dramatic and rapidly evolving transformation in recent years, driven by the relentless pursuit of innovation and the constant expansion of AI applications across various sectors.

In this dynamic landscape, a wave of new players is reshaping the competitive environment, with one of the most promising entrants being DeepSeek, a Chinese startup founded in 2023 by the visionary entrepreneur Liang Wenfeng. Though still in its nascent stages, DeepSeek has rapidly emerged as a formidable contender to the dominant AI giants of the West, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini.

What sets DeepSeek apart from its competitors is its flagship model, DeepSeek-R1, which has garnered attention for its remarkable performance, rivaling the capabilities of leading AI systems in natural language processing, machine learning, and problem-solving. Despite its power and efficiency, DeepSeek-R1 stands out by offering a significantly more resource-efficient and cost-effective solution, making it an attractive option for developers, companies, and researchers looking to harness AI technology without the high financial burden often associated with Western models. In addition to its performance advantages, DeepSeek is also open-source, empowering the global developer community to adapt, modify, and deploy the model according to their specific needs and objectives. This openness fosters an inclusive ecosystem, offering flexibility and control that stands in stark contrast to the more closed-off approaches taken by many of its Western counterparts.

As DeepSeek continues to develop and expand, it represents a new era of AI innovation—one that is more accessible, adaptable, and capable of disrupting the established status quo in the AI industry.

The Rise of DeepSeek, Its Disruption,

and the Implications Within the AI Industry

In recent years, the AI landscape has experienced a remarkable shift, with China-based DeepSeek emerging as a major disruptor. This disruption has profound implications not only for the development of artificial intelligence itself but also for the broader dynamics of the industry, particularly when it comes to competition, investment strategies, and the accessibility of cutting-edge technologies. At the core of DeepSeek’s meteoric rise is its flagship AI model, DeepSeek-R1, which has been crafted through an extraordinary investment of resources, including approximately 2,000 NVIDIA H800 GPUs, deployed over a period of 55 days. The total cost of developing DeepSeek-R1 is estimated at around $5.58 million, a figure that pales in comparison to the massive investments required by leading U.S. tech giants for similar models.

The efficiency and cost-effectiveness of DeepSeek-R1 have caused significant reverberations throughout the AI industry. Traditional models developed by major Western tech companies such as OpenAI, Google, and Microsoft often come with exorbitant price tags due to the high costs of hardware, computational power, and research and development. In contrast, DeepSeek’s ability to achieve comparable performance with a fraction of the investment has positioned it as a compelling alternative for both large enterprises and smaller research groups looking for a more cost-efficient means of accessing advanced AI capabilities. This price-to-performance advantage has shaken the foundation of the AI market, prompting investors to reassess the valuations of dominant tech companies.

In fact, the rise of DeepSeek has had tangible market consequences. The launch and success of DeepSeek-R1 have contributed to a noticeable decline in the stock values of major companies such as Microsoft, Alphabet (Google), and NVIDIA—companies that have long been at the forefront of AI development. The competitive edge that DeepSeek has gained by offering a highly efficient and accessible alternative has put pressure on these established players to rethink their strategies and invest further in making their own AI solutions more cost-effective and adaptable to changing market conditions. For investors, this shift signals a potential reorientation of where AI development is headed, with emerging players like DeepSeek challenging the traditional dominance of American tech titans.

Beyond the economic implications, the differing philosophies underlying the development of DeepSeek and ChatGPT represent a fundamental divergence in how AI is approached and controlled. While both models offer similar capabilities in natural language processing and other advanced AI tasks, they embody starkly contrasting ideologies when it comes to accessibility, collaboration, and openness. OpenAI’s ChatGPT operates within a tightly controlled, closed ecosystem, where its data, algorithms, and models are not easily accessible to external developers or researchers. This structure emphasizes stringent control over how the technology is used, limiting opportunities for independent experimentation or modification. For many, this closed approach raises concerns about the monopolization of AI development and the lack of opportunities for smaller developers or academic institutions to engage meaningfully with the technology.

In stark contrast, DeepSeek’s approach is rooted in openness and accessibility. The company has made DeepSeek-R1 an open-source model, allowing developers, researchers, and institutions across the globe to access the technology, modify it, and apply it to various use cases. This open-source model is a game-changer for the AI field, as it democratizes access to some of the most advanced AI capabilities available today. By enabling developers to freely experiment with the model and build on it, DeepSeek fosters a more collaborative, transparent environment where innovation can flourish beyond corporate walls. This accessibility not only accelerates the pace of AI research and development but also lowers the barriers to entry for smaller developers, startups, and academic institutions who may have been previously excluded from working with such powerful AI systems due to high costs or restrictive licensing agreements.

The implications of DeepSeek’s rise extend far beyond the technical performance of its model; they touch on broader issues of how AI development is structured and who gets to participate in shaping the future of artificial intelligence. By providing a more open and inclusive platform, DeepSeek has disrupted the traditional power dynamics of the AI industry, challenging the closed ecosystems of larger players and pushing the entire industry toward greater transparency and collaboration. As more developers and organizations flock to DeepSeek’s open-source model, it is clear that the shift toward openness could pave the way for more equitable access to AI technology and more diverse contributions to its evolution.

Ultimately, the disruption caused by DeepSeek signals a pivotal moment in the AI industry, where economic, philosophical, and geopolitical factors are all at play. The success of DeepSeek-R1 has not only underlined the potential for more cost-effective AI solutions but also highlighted the importance of openness and collaboration in driving the next generation of AI innovation. As the industry continues to evolve, the rise of DeepSeek serves as a reminder that the future of AI will likely be shaped not just by technological advancements, but by the philosophies and approaches that guide its development and deployment.

Raising "red flags" over geopolitical and social matters

However, this use of AI, whilst hailed as technological triumph by its creators, also disrupt not just market norms but also introducing questions regarding the role of Artificial Intelligence in various issues like geopolitics. Especially in the Philippines where DeepSeek, being China-based, has created concern over certain geopolitical issues, raising "red flags" regarding controversial matters.

In an instance, the Facebook page Philippines Defense Forces Forum tested the China-based AI and reported that the app provides answers favorable to the Chinese position regarding the disputed West Philippine Sea, this contradicts the contradicts the 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which favored the Philippines. And by presenting China’s position as factual, downplaying the Philippines's claim and the international ruling when asked about territorial disputes, such responses have sparked concerns that the China-based AI app could be used as a tool to subtly influence public opinion, shaping narratives to align with China’s geopolitical goals.

Similarly, in issues regarding Taiwan, DeepSeek describes the island as an “inalienable part of China’s territory since ancient times,” denying the existence of a “Taiwan Issue.” In contrast, other AI platforms like ChatGPT offer more nuanced perspectives, acknowledging the complexity of Taiwan’s political status.

These controversies highlights the role of using AI in shaping public discourse, especially in a time when fake news and deepfakes became a major matter to address with, AI systems, unlike traditional media, presents itself in a conversational manner with information passing as believable with users likely to pass it as objective truth.

As such, AI apps such as DeepSeek with its alleged biases also raise questions about the ethical responsibilities of its developers in addressing controversial topics.

A "Technological Triumph" with Caution

The emergence of AI-powered applications from both US-based giants like OpenAI and China’s DeepSeek has undoubtedly been hailed as a technological triumph, marking a significant milestone in the field of artificial intelligence. These breakthroughs have introduced models that are capable of processing and generating human-like text, solving complex problems, and offering innovative solutions across industries—from customer service and healthcare to education and beyond. The remarkable capabilities of these platforms are reshaping how we interact with technology, creating new possibilities and efficiencies that were once unimaginable.

However, the rapid rise of these AI models has not been without its controversies, sparking intense debate and raising important questions about their ethical use and broader societal implications. While their technological achievements are impressive, concerns have emerged regarding their impact on information integrity, data privacy, and the potential misuse of these platforms. For instance, the vast amounts of data that these models are trained on can raise issues about consent, transparency, and the potential for bias in the AI's responses. Furthermore, as these models become increasingly integrated into various aspects of daily life, the risk of misinformation and the manipulation of facts becomes a growing concern, particularly when AI-generated content is indistinguishable from human-produced material.

The geopolitical dimension of this conversation cannot be overlooked either. The development of AI systems like those from OpenAI and DeepSeek is not just a technological race—it is also a reflection of the ongoing global power struggle, where the policies, regulations, and intentions of developers are closely tied to national interests. This raises significant questions about censorship, particularly in countries with strict government control over information. The potential for these AI systems to be shaped by the political and ideological frameworks of their home countries adds another layer of complexity, especially when these models are used to shape public discourse or influence global narratives.

Given these multifaceted concerns, it is crucial for users, developers, and policymakers to maintain a careful and discerning eye on the ethical, legal, and geopolitical implications of AI technologies. As much as these innovations offer tremendous opportunities, they also highlight the need for vigilance—ensuring that these tools are used responsibly and that the systems guiding them remain transparent, fair, and accountable. In this rapidly advancing field, scrutiny over both the sources of information and the ethical practices behind these technologies is essential to safeguard against unintended consequences and preserve the integrity of the digital landscape.

“Leaping Forward: Unity, Travail, and Renewal in the Year of the Wood Snake”

“Leaping Forward: Unity, Travail, and Renewal

 in the Year of the Wood Snake”

In the bustling streets of Ongpin, Binondo, Manila, the nation gathers in celebration of the Lunar New Year, marking the arrival of the Year of the Wood Snake. Lanterns line the streets in brilliant hues, dragon and lion dances weave through crowds of onlookers, and the aroma of traditional delicacies fills the air. It is a time of renewal, reflection, and hope—a moment when cultural traditions serve as a unifying force for communities across the nation. 

Recognizing the importance of this occasion, the government has once again declared January 29, 2025, a special non-working holiday. This act honors the Filipino-Chinese community’s enduring contributions to the nation’s cultural and economic life, and it underscores the collective spirit that binds Filipinos of all backgrounds in times of celebration and challenge. 

Yet, as in the past years, the nation faces familiar struggles and persistent challenges. The same issues may resurface, and the same hurdles remain to be overcome. But the Year of the Wood Snake offers a symbol of transformation, wisdom, and resilience. It is a reminder that, with determination and unity, this year can be different. It can be a time for greater strides toward progress, a deeper commitment to collective action, and a season of bold initiatives that bring about meaningful change. 

This Lunar New Year is more than a celebration; it is an invitation to reflect on the possibilities that lie ahead. It calls for a greater commitment to unity, hard work, and shared purpose—qualities that can transform this season into a turning point for the nation. With the people’s will and unwavering effort, the challenges of yesterday can be met with solutions born from cooperation and perseverance, paving the way for leaps forward in this new year. 

Let this season inspire not only joy but also resolve, as the nation embarks on another journey together—toward a brighter, stronger, and more unified future. 

“Whispers of Spring: A Tết Awakening”

 “Whispers of Spring: A Tết Awakening”

Hope the Breaking Dawn 

On Tết’s eve, the lanterns sway in the wind, 

In Hanoi’s streets, old whispers never rescind. 

Peach blossoms bloom, red petals softly fall, 

A promise of spring, the warmest call. 

Incense rises, curls like a dragon’s breath, 

Bridging this life and ancestors in death. 

Under banyan trees, old tales are retold, 

Wisdom of elders, like jade and gold. 

The Red River gleams with the moon’s embrace, 

A silver thread in the city’s timeworn face. 

Paper-lantern stars light the path anew, 

Carrying dreams of the many, the few. 

Drums echo from temples, a steady beat, 

Merging with laughter in alleys discreet. 

The children dance with sparklers in hand, 

While kites soar high over emerald land. 

As the rooster calls to greet breaking dawn, 

Bamboo shadows stretch, the old night withdrawn. 

The city exhales; the future takes its place, 

A fleeting moment, eternity’s grace. 

Hanoi, adorned in your finest array, 

May hope and joy crown your Tết day.

 “This Tết, My Heart’s Desire” 

 How I wish to be with her this Tết, 

Where lanterns glow and hearts are set, 

In the warmth of spring’s embrace, 

I long to see her smiling face. 

 The winds of fortune gently blow, 

Whispering secrets we both know, 

In the dance of blossoms, soft and bright, 

We could weave our love through the night. 

 The moon above, so full and clear, 

Reflects the dreams we hold so near, 

How I wish to hold her hand, 

And walk with her across this land. 

 For Tết is more than time or place, 

It’s love that lingers in the space, 

Between our hearts, across the years, 

A wish to be with her, through all fears. 

 How I wish to be with her this Tết, 

In a world where love’s the only bet. 

A moment shared, a life begun, 

With her, forever, my heart will run.

The Red Flag Over Tết 

The red flag flutters, bold and high, 

Under the watchful Tết sky. 

Gold stars gleam like distant suns, 

Marking the path where the new year runs.

In Hanoi’s streets, the banners sway, 

Welcoming spring with their bright display. 

Children laugh, their cheeks aglow,

Under the flag’s enduring flow. 

 Peach blossoms nod in the morning breeze, 

While incense rises from old banyan trees. 

The drums resound, the firecrackers sing, 

Echoes of joy in the season of spring. 

 The Red River hums its timeless song, 

Carrying the past as it flows along. 

Above it all, the flag takes flight, 

A symbol of courage, a beacon of light. 

 O red flag, you bear the weight 

Of history’s trials, of a nation’s fate. 

Through every Tết, you rise anew, 

A steadfast promise, a vision true. 

 May your colors shine in the dawn’s first ray, 

Guiding the people on Tết’s bright day.

When Flowers Bloom 

 The night is deep, the air is still, 

A whisper stirs beyond the hill. 

The blossoms wake, their petals flare, 

A secret carried in the air. 

 The rivers run, though shadows bind, 

Yet currents move with purpose blind. 

The bamboo sways, its rhythm clear, 

A silent drum for those who hear. 

 Flowers bloom where none should grow, 

In every crack where winds might blow. 

A signal sent beneath the moon, 

Hope’s message whispers: “Coming soon.” 

 The earth does tremble, quiet no more, 

As freedom knocks on every door. 

Beneath the blooms, the roots extend, 

The storm begins where blossoms bend. 

 In the dawn, when colors ignite, 

The flag may rise with morning light. 

Let flowers bloom and carry the tune: 

Change is near, and coming soon.

Looking Back: The Hollow Promises and Lasting Legacy of Duterte’s Populism

Looking Back: The Hollow Promises and Lasting Legacy of Duterte’s Populism

When Rodrigo Duterte launched his presidential campaign in 2016, his rhetoric struck a chord with the disillusioned masses who felt neglected by the political establishment for decades. He championed the causes of peace, order, and populist nationalism, promising a safer, more sovereign Philippines with an end to social injustice. For many ordinary Filipinos, these promises were a beacon of hope in a country plagued by corruption, crime, and inequality. The image he painted was one of a strong leader who would cut through bureaucracy and bring about the much-needed change. His popularity soared, and his message resonated deeply with a people yearning for a shift from institutional stagnancy.

But, as history tends to reveal, the appeal of populist promises often fades once the veneer of change is peeled away. Duterte’s administration may have indeed created an “atmosphere of peace” in some sectors, particularly in urban areas where crime rates seemed to drop. However, the very same people who once supported his vision now find themselves disillusioned by the hollow rhetoric that fueled his rise to power. The promises that seemed so vital to his campaign turned out to be little more than tactical soundbites meant to rally voters — tools to secure power rather than sincere calls for reform.

Duterte himself, in private moments, admitted that his populist promises were often just that: promises. The “war on drugs,” the cornerstone of his administration, was presented as a bold crusade against crime, but it quickly devolved into an issue of extrajudicial killings that the international community, as well as human rights organizations, condemned. At home, while some praised the crackdown, others began to question the real cost of such methods. Was this the kind of peace Duterte promised — a peace achieved by fear and violence?

Furthermore, the broader promises of Duterte — the promises of national sovereignty, agrarian justice, and industrialization — remained largely unfulfilled. His “independent foreign policy,” which he touted as an assertion of national pride, ended up being more about appeasing China than asserting the Philippines’ interests. Despite his fiery rhetoric about taking a stand in the South China Sea, Duterte’s actions painted a different picture — one of acquiescence and dependence on foreign powers. The grand promise to make the Philippines a self-sufficient, industrialized nation also fell flat. The reality was a series of token “reforms” designed to placate the electorate, but not address the deeper structural issues that have plagued the country for decades.

The most glaring example of Duterte’s disconnection from the real needs of the people came during the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead of relying on experts, doctors, and scientists to guide the country through the crisis, Duterte treated the pandemic as yet another matter of peace and order. His decision to place generals and policemen at the forefront of the government’s response was a stark reminder of his militarized approach to governance. The so-called “Task Force” to combat the pandemic did little to address the pressing health concerns of Filipinos, focusing instead on enforcing lockdowns with an iron fist. Duterte’s handling of the situation revealed the true nature of his leadership style: authoritarian, populist, and fundamentally disconnected from the reality of the people he swore to serve.

In retrospect, Duterte’s promises — whether of a drug-free society, a sovereign nation, or agrarian justice — were often just empty words designed to secure the loyalty of the masses. His government might have created the illusion of order, but beneath that façade, the country remained stuck in the same cycle of corruption and inequality. Duterte’s “change” was little more than a carefully constructed illusion, a fantasy built on the hopes and dreams of ordinary Filipinos who, in the end, were betrayed.

Even now, as the Marcos administration seeks to undo some of Duterte’s more radical policies, the remnants of his populism remain entrenched in the national psyche. The fantasy of a strong, authoritarian figure who can single-handedly fix the country is still alive, albeit more subdued. Duterte’s legacy, however, is not one of meaningful change, but of fractured promises, broken systems, and a people who have been left to pick up the pieces of a government that promised much but delivered so little.

In looking back after the Duterte era, we are left with the hard truth: the cost of populist promises is often too high. The lure of easy solutions and the appeal of strongman politics can be tempting, but they rarely result in the deep, systemic changes that are needed to build a more just, equitable society. The future of the Philippines lies not in the rhetoric of populism, but in the hard work of creating real, lasting change — a change that addresses the root causes of inequality, corruption, and injustice, rather than merely masking them with promises of order and control. 

The Contradictions after the “Peace Rally”: Power, Politics, and the Illusion of Unity

The Contradictions after the “Peace Rally”: 

Power, Politics, and the Illusion of Unity

By Kirit Thanarat

The idea of rallying for peace may sound appealing, particularly to those who sincerely desire it. Calls for unity, reconciliation, and national stability resonate deeply in any society. However, when such calls emerge from those deeply entrenched in power struggles—those who corrupt, those who oppress—should they still be taken at face value? 

As the campaign period unfolds, a so-called “peace rally” has drawn significant attention, not just for its sheer size but for the political weight it carries. While its organizers claim it is an act of national unity, its timing and execution suggest otherwise. The presence of hundreds of thousands, mobilized with precision, demonstrates something far beyond an ordinary assembly. To politicians, this is not just a peaceful gathering—it is a projection of power, a reminder that their support can determine electoral outcomes. 

Religious Solidarity or Political Leverage? 

This is the reality of religious influence in politics. While cloaked in the language of faith and harmony, such movements often serve as tools of political leverage. Politicians who witness such numbers—who see the extent to which religious institutions command their members—are compelled to take notice. The implied message is clear: support our interests, or risk losing the votes we control. 

This extends beyond mere endorsements. In a high-stakes election, a bloc of several hundred thousand votes is not just an asset—it is a kingmaker. That is the true power of religious solidarity: it does not simply provide moral guidance but ensures direct influence over governance. Any candidate who wishes to secure such backing knows that aligning with these groups is a political necessity. 

Defending the Embattled: A Shield Against Criticism 

Yet the rally’s timing raises deeper concerns. Some observers note that while it presents itself as a gathering for peace, it also functions as a defensive barrier for embattled figures facing public scrutiny. The president’s recent opposition to impeachment calls against the vice president—despite accusations of betrayal of public trust—further fuels these suspicions. 

Is this truly about justice, or is it about preserving a crucial political alliance? The groups behind the rally are not merely advocating for peace—they are also defending a figure who remains at the center of controversy. The question then becomes: are they seeking genuine national unity, or are they using the language of peace to protect those in power? 

The Paradox of Their Strength 

If one is to be blunt, the rally was a demonstration of power, not peace. And if this is truly about power, then why stop at peaceful demonstrations? 

Movements that claim victimhood while amassing influence often follow a historical pattern. At first, they seek legitimacy through peaceful means—mobilizing numbers, pressuring politicians, demanding recognition. But history has shown that when such movements perceive themselves as besieged, they often escalate their tactics. 

If they are truly oppressed, as they claim, why not take their struggle further? If endurance is no longer enough, why not follow the logic of those who justify holy war? Many radical movements have used similar rhetoric—claims of persecution, struggles against injustice, and the belief that their cause is divinely sanctioned. If they truly see themselves as under siege, why not raise the sword and fight “in the way of God”? 

Imam Khomeini, the architect of the Iranian Revolution, made this clear: 

“Those who say that religion is separate from politics understand neither religion nor politics.” 

If these rallies are truly about faith, then they are also about power. Khomeini further emphasized: 

“Islam is not a religion of pacifism. Islam is a religion of activism and revolution.” 

If these demonstrations seek to uphold justice, then they should also demand sacrifice. But instead of a true struggle for righteousness, what is presented is a carefully calculated display of force—one that ensures influence without risking direct confrontation. Sorry to quote Khomeini, but the struggle for peace and unity is not driven by peace and unity alone but the struggle for righteousness, truth, and justice- words far from those who defend the status quo.

A False Peace: The Illusion of Unity 

To those who truly seek peace, unity, and justice, this contradiction is evident. While some may be fooled by the slogans of “peace and unity,” others see a different reality—one closer to the facts on the ground. 

The Bible itself warns against those who preach peace while serving hidden interests: 

“They dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious. ‘Peace, peace,’ they say, when there is no peace.” (Jeremiah 6:14) 

This passage reflects a deeper truth—peace cannot exist where injustice is tolerated. When the powerful call for peace while shielding corruption, their message is not one of harmony but of control. 

Similarly, Proverbs 11:9 states: 

“With their mouths the godless destroy their neighbors, but through knowledge the righteous escape.” 

The rally may proclaim itself as an effort to heal divisions, but what it truly represents is the calculated use of religious fervor to secure political gains. The question remains: does this movement genuinely seek justice, or does it merely seek to consolidate power? 

Compare that spectacle to the rallies in Yemen, where those facing bombardment, starvation, and war do not beg for unity with their oppressors. Instead, they chant: 

 “We do not care—make it a world war.” 

 This is not an endorsement of war but a recognition of reality. When oppression is real, the response is not to hold rallies calling for a fragile peace. The response is resistance, confrontation, and an unwillingness to compromise with those in power. 

 Those who call for “peace” while securing political deals, while shielding those in authority, while ensuring their movement remains unchallenged—these are not revolutionaries, nor are they truly oppressed. They are participants in the very power structures they claim to challenge.

Beyond the Facade: What Comes Next? 

This is the underlying question: will this rally remain just another show of force, or will it eventually escalate? History has shown that movements with such rhetoric do not remain passive forever. First, they present themselves as peaceful. Then, they make demands. And when those demands are not met, they sharpen their message—and, if necessary, their weapons. 

If this rally is truly about justice, then it must eventually demand sacrifice. Because no movement that seeks to wield power—whether religious or political—rests on words alone. 

As the campaign period continues, the public must critically assess what is happening. Is this truly a call for peace? Or is it the opening move in a larger political game? If their demands are met, will they be satisfied? Or is this just the beginning? 

True peace is based on justice, not silence. And for those who claim to be oppressed, peace is never given—it is seized. 

The Black Nazarene: A Call to True Devotion, Justice, and Mercy

The Black Nazarene: A Call to True Devotion, Justice, and Mercy

The devotion to the Most Holy Jesus the Nazarene is a powerful testament to the unwavering faith that burns in the hearts of the poor and afflicted, especially in the streets of Manila, where the faithful gather in profound reverence. At the renowned Quiapo procession, the Black Nazarene—a darkened and weathered image of Christ—serves as a beacon of hope for countless souls, offering light to those in darkness. Yet, this devotion, while deeply cherished, must be understood more deeply, lest it become reduced to mere material requests or fleeting emotions. 

The true meaning of this devotion is not in external acts of piety alone but in an intimate participation in the suffering and sacrifice of Christ. Those who seek to touch the image of the Nazarene are not simply recalling the Passion of Christ but are invited to experience it in their own lives. Jesus himself calls all to take up their cross daily and follow him, reminding us that faith is not just about seeking relief from suffering but about embracing the trials and hardships that come with it. Through our own sufferings, we are invited to participate in the mystery of redemption. 

In a world dominated by inequality and poverty, many turn to God for both spiritual and material relief. While it is true that Christ healed the sick and fed the hungry, his call was always to a deeper conversion of heart. True faith does not rest in earthly prosperity but in the peace that comes from God. As the Apostle Paul teaches, it is the peace of God that surpasses all understanding and guards our hearts and minds. 

However, this devotion must also lead to action. If the poor and suffering cry out to God, the faithful and the Church must not remain unmoved. Faith must be lived through works of mercy and justice. As the Book of James reminds us, “Faith without works is dead.” The Church has a duty to not only console the suffering but to work towards improving the social conditions that perpetuate this suffering. Devotion to the Nazarene must inspire us to acts of solidarity and the renewal of society. 

The title “Black Nazarene” holds profound significance. In his darkened image, Christ is found among the poor, the broken, and the marginalized. As Isaiah said, he is “a man of sorrows, acquainted with grief.” Yet, in this suffering, Christ remains Emmanuel—God with us. He is not a distant observer but a companion who walks with us, suffers with us, and lives in hope with us. 

Ultimately, true devotion to the Nazarene is not a mere tradition or superstition. It must be a faith that leads to action. Those who venerate the Nazarene are called to imitate him—by carrying their own crosses, serving the poor, and promoting justice. Let us remember Christ’s invitation: “Come to me, all you who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest.” May devotion to the Most Holy Jesus the Nazarene inspire us not only to reflect on his sacrifice but also to live lives marked by faith, justice, mercy, and love for the poor.  

A Christian's continuing cry for Justice: As the Nazarene's 'Andas' pulled harder towards the way

A Christian's continuing cry for Justice:
As the Nazarene's 'Andas' pulled harder towards the way

The Traslación is an annual religious procession in Manila, where the Black Nazarene, a life-sized statue of Jesus Christ, is paraded through the streets. Devotees, many barefoot, follow the statue with deep reverence, demonstrating their profound faith in Christ’s suffering and a desire for healing, forgiveness, and grace. For many, this is more than a ritual; it is an expression of unity with Christ's passion, sacrifice, and ultimate resurrection.

For those who participate in the Traslación, this is not just a procession of religious expression; it is, in a sense, a battle against personal suffering and a declaration of resistance against the trials that life brings.

The words of the Apostle Paul resonate deeply here: “For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39). The perseverance of the devotees, in their fervent journey through the streets of Quiapo, mirrors this unshakable belief. Their physical exhaustion and emotional intensity become a metaphor for the challenges and burdens they endure for their faith.

However, there are those who argue that Christians should abandon their veneration of the Black Nazarene and other holy symbols that have been cherished for centuries. They do not understand the profound significance of these devotions. They fail to recognize that it is through the passion, suffering, and resurrection of Christ that the foundation of the Christian faith was established. The Black Nazarene, with His image of Christ carrying the cross, is not just a symbol of sorrow; it is a symbol of the power of divine love and defiance against tyranny.

The Black Nazarene represents a reflection of Christ’s own sacrifice for humanity. It is through His suffering and death that the victory over sin and death was won, and this victory carries with it a charge for all who follow Him. The procession of the Black Nazarene and the devotion to His passion have transcended simple remembrance—they are a call to action. The walk of the Nazarene, bearing the cross through the streets, is not just a historical event; it is a call to every believer to take up their cross and follow Him, to live lives of courage, resistance, and justice.

Christ’s journey to Calvary, marked by His rejection of the powers that sought to crush Him, serves as the model for every Christian who seeks to stand firm against injustice. "Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:10). This divine message of defiance, made manifest through Christ’s “No” to evil, to tyranny, to oppression, must be carried out daily and everywhere. The message of the Black Nazarene is clear: no matter how great the empire of sin and oppression, a small but committed group can stand firm against it in the name of justice and righteousness. And now as it invites every faithful to reflect on the suffering of Christ, whose death on the cross is seen as the ultimate act of sacrificial love. Jesus himself said, “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). The Black Nazarene, with its suffering Christ, whose words said "I'm Thirst" during his passion symbolizes this profound act of selflessness, which devotees recall as they follow the procession, often enduring physical hardship in the hopes of obtaining spiritual healing.

The Black Nazarene’s journey is an emblem not of a defeated people, but of a people called to militant faith. The cross He bore was not only a symbol of suffering but also of the unwavering resistance to the forces of darkness. His cry of suffering echoes the cry of all who have been oppressed and marginalized, and it is this cry that Christians must answer. Many who criticize the tradition of honoring the Black Nazarene fail to see the depth of its spiritual and political significance. They mistakenly view the devotion to the cross as nothing more than a display of grief, but in reality, it is a radical declaration of faith and defiance against all forms of injustice.

The enemies of Christ’s message—those who perpetuate cruelty, injustice, and sin—fear the powerful cry of the oppressed. This cry, embodied in the suffering of Christ and symbolized by the Black Nazarene, is a force that calls Christians not only to personal devotion but also to resistance. It is the cry of solidarity with the poor, the marginalized, the persecuted, and those who stand against tyranny. It is a shout of victory against evil, for in the end, Christ’s death on the cross was not a defeat, but the greatest victory ever won.

The procession of the Black Nazarene, with its powerful display of faith, is an embodiment of resistance. It is an act of defiance, a statement that, just as Christ carried His cross, so too must His followers bear witness to the truth and stand firm against the injustice that pervades the world. This devotion is not passive, but active. It is not about a helpless weeping nation, but about a nation empowered by faith to rise up against oppression and proclaim the message of justice.

To the youth, to the next generation of Christians, the call is clear: Do not allow the message of the Black Nazarene to become trivialized. It is not a mere tradition of sorrow, but a profound act of militant faith. The rituals of the Passion of Christ, including the veneration of the Black Nazarene, are not merely commemorations of past events; they are calls to live out the example of Christ in a world that continues to be ravaged by injustice. It is a challenge to every Christian to stand firm in their faith, to resist the powers that seek to oppress, and to fight for justice.

This is not about mourning for the sake of mourning. As the Apostle Paul reminds us: "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (Romans 12:21). The Black Nazarene, like Christ’s own suffering, is a reminder that faith requires action, courage, and resilience. As Christians, they are called to participate in the ongoing battle between good and evil, between justice and oppression. The cross they bear is not simply a symbol of personal suffering, but a public declaration of their opposition to the forces of injustice and cruelty.

The Black Nazarene is a sign—a political and spiritual sign—of resistance. It is not merely a relic of the past, but a living call to continue the work of Christ, to proclaim liberty to the captives, to heal the brokenhearted, and to stand with the oppressed. These devotions and rituals must be kept alive, for they serve as powerful reminders that Christ’s mission continues to be relevant today. The Black Nazarene’s path is the path of resistance, the path of courage, and the path of justice.

As the Bible states: "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me" (Matthew 16:24). The Black Nazarene’s walk is the Christian walk, a walk that leads to Calvary, to resurrection, and to the ultimate triumph of justice. Christians must continue to follow that path, bearing witness to the truth and standing firm against the forces of evil that seek to oppress the world.

Let no one underestimate the power of this devotion. The Black Nazarene is not simply a symbol of sorrow, but a rallying cry for justice, a bold declaration that the way of Christ is the way of defiance against evil, and the way of standing firm for the cause of the oppressed. 

When in every Action becomes a Traslacion

When in every Action becomes a Traslacion

Each year, on January 9, the faithful gather from every corner of the Philippines to partake in a profound act of devotion—the Feast of the Black Nazarene. In the heat of the day and the press of the crowd, they come with prayers on their lips and hope in their hearts, seeking guidance, healing, and strength.

At the heart of this sacred tradition is the Traslacion, the solemn procession that carries the revered image of the Black Nazarene through the streets of Manila. It is more than a journey; it is a reflection of Christ’s own path to Calvary, a living testimony to sacrifice and salvation. “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me” (Luke 9:23). Here, faith takes form in movement, in struggle, in every hand reaching out toward the image of Christ.

For centuries, this devotion has bound the faithful together, a reminder that suffering is not borne alone. Bare feet meet the scorching pavement, millions press forward, arms outstretched, as if to touch even the hem of His garment. “If I just touch His clothes, I will be healed” (Mark 5:28). The fervor of the devotees is not desperation, but belief—a conviction that faith, when lived, transforms.

The Traslacion is not merely an event; it is an expression of a deep, abiding faith that finds its strength in sacrifice and perseverance. Pope Benedict XVI, in "Spe Salvi", reminds that suffering, when united with Christ, becomes redemptive: “The true measure of humanity is essentially determined in relationship to suffering and to the sufferer. This holds true for the individual as well as for society” (Spe Salvi, 38). In carrying the cross, Christ entered fully into human suffering; in following Him, the faithful recognize that trials, too, can become a path to grace.

Through the winding streets, the Black Nazarene moves, and with Him, every soul that carries a burden, every heart that yearns for healing. “Let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus” (Hebrews 12:1). Pope Francis, in "Evangelii Gaudium", speaks of a faith that must be taken beyond the church walls and lived in the streets: “The Church which ‘goes forth’ is a community of missionary disciples who take the first step, who are involved and supportive, who bear fruit and rejoice” (Evangelii Gaudium, 24). The Traslacion embodies this very call—a faith that walks, struggles, and reaches out, a faith that moves.

Let this day be a call to remembrance. Let it speak of Christ’s unwavering presence in every trial, His enduring love in every sorrow. “Cast all your anxiety on Him because He cares for you” (1 Peter 5:7). And as the faithful cry out “Viva Señor Nazareno!”, may their lives carry forward the lesson of this day: that faith is not merely spoken, but lived—step by step, in devotion and trust. 

“Jesus Nazareno: Glory in Struggle, Hope in Liberation”

“Jesus Nazareno: Glory in Struggle, Hope in Liberation”

By Ted Tuvera

For the devotees of the Black Nazarene — and there are millions! — the title "Nazarene" or "Nazareno" is revered. But in the biblical and historical context of Jesus of Nazareth, it is rather discriminating. In Jesus' context (and even in the image itself), it is one that is suspect.

For instance, in the first chapter of John's Gospel, when Philip introduced Jesus of Nazareth as "the one about whom Moses wrote in the law, and also the prophets" to Nathanael, the latter responded "Can anything good come from Nazareth?" (Jn 1:45-46)

Imagine it as of almost the same tone when one is warned — with condescension — of people from Manila districts where thugs thrive.

In John's passion narrative, those who were about to arrest Jesus strongly searched for him, identifying him as a criminal "Jesus the Nazorean" (Jn 18:4-5, 7). A condemned criminal hanging, dying on the Cross, Pilate ordered that an inscription be pegged on top of Jesus' head: "Jesus the Nazorean, the King of the Jews." (Jn 19:19)

Imagine it as the condemnation written on placards back at the height of the government's drug war where thousands fell to extrajudicial killings: "Drug Pusher - Huwag tularan!"

The traslacion itself could be imagined as a procession where a condemned criminal is being paraded.

If there is a stand-out message that's worth reckoning about this Filipino tradition, it has to be the solemnity, the glory of God that is found and realized in the people's struggle for justice, for peace, for liberation.

And this is consistent with the whole story of Jesus of Nazareth who was born poor, ministered as a poor itinerant rabbi, and mocked and condemned to death as a poor criminal.

Paul, in that beautiful hymn in his letter to the Philippians, wrote: "Though he was in the form of God, Jesus did not equality with God something to be grasped at. Rather, he emptied himself and took the form of a slave, being born in the likeness of men." (Phil 2:6-7)

Just as there are millions of devotees of the Nazareno, there are also millions of reasons why they (we) flock to him.

Sure, God, Jesus can be glorified in many ways — such as in our fancy liturgies and solemn rituals and hymns (that are all wonderful). But identifying him as the Nazareno draws us to glorify him where he really was, where he really is: in the midst of a people that struggles – journeying in hope along the path of liberation.

VIVA JESUS NAZARENO! 

Marcos’ Shake-Up in the National Security Council: For the sake of National Security? Or Outright Politics?

Marcos’ Shake-Up in the National Security Council: 

For the sake of National Security? Or Outright Politics?

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s recent decision to remove Vice President Sara Duterte and three former presidents from the National Security Council (NSC) has sparked controversy, with critics calling it a political maneuver rather than a strategic realignment of national security priorities. 

Through Executive Order No. 81, signed on December 30, 2024, Marcos removed Vice President Duterte—daughter of former President Rodrigo Duterte—as well as former Presidents Duterte, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, and Joseph Estrada from the NSC. 

While the order does not explicitly mention China or the West Philippine Sea (WPS), many see it as a response to Beijing’s increasing aggression in Philippine waters—an issue where the Duterte administration was widely criticized for its soft stance. 

Of moves Echoing the Past 

This political shake-up has reignited memories of how former President Rodrigo Duterte sidelined then-Vice President Leni Robredo from all government meetings, including the NSC. In 2016, Duterte’s Cabinet Secretary Jun Evasco Jr. sent Robredo a text message informing her that she was barred from attending Cabinet meetings, despite serving as the chair of the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC). As a result, Robredo resigned on December 5, 2016, citing “major differences in principles and values” with the administration. 

Now, Marcos’ EO 81 effectively sidelines Sara Duterte in a similar fashion. In an open letter last November, the vice president had already raised concerns about being excluded from NSC meetings despite her membership. The executive order simply made it official. 

Meanwhile, those who support the Duterte faction claims that the controversy also brings back memories of how Marcos Jr.’s own father, the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr., removed his vice president, Fernando Lopez, from the National Security Council through Executive Order No. 13 in 1966. 

Yet, one might ask: Was Lopez complaining? The year was 1966. Martial Law was declared in 1972. He was also Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources from 1965 to 1971.

Unlike today’s political climate, where every move is scrutinized and turned into a battleground for influence, Lopez’s removal did not cause an uproar. Whether this was due to the political culture of the time, Lopez’s own political calculations, or the looming consolidation of power that would lead to Martial Law is up for debate. 

‘Dirty Politics’ or Justified Decision? 

Former Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Salvador Panelo strongly condemned the decision, calling it an attempt to weaken Sara Duterte’s “political star power.” He argued that the removal of Arroyo and Estrada was merely a cover to make it appear that Duterte was not being singled out. 

In response to Panelo’s criticism, Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin dismissed his arguments, stating that the former presidential spokesperson had “no moral authority” to question the decision. Bersamin pointed out that Panelo himself had previously supported the exclusion of former Vice President Leni Robredo from national security meetings under the Duterte administration. 

This contradiction raises a critical question: Is this truly about governance, or is it merely political convenience at play? 

While Marcos’ allies insist that the move is about streamlining national security decision-making, its political implications are undeniable. It marks a clear break between the Marcos and Duterte camps—former allies in the 2022 elections—while also removing Duterte loyalists who have historically had a more conciliatory approach toward China. 

A New Direction for National Security? 

The NSC, a crucial body responsible for advising the president on national security matters, has long been a mix of political and security figures. Whether removing former presidents and the sitting vice president will improve its effectiveness remains to be seen. But given the heightened tensions in the WPS, the move signals a shift in how the Marcos administration intends to handle the country’s most pressing security threats. 

Was this a necessary restructuring to ensure a more decisive response to national security concerns? Or was it merely an act of political consolidation, sidelining potential rivals ahead of the 2028 elections? 

One thing is clear: this decision is not just about national security—it is about power. 

The Etymology of Maynila: A Linguistic and Geographic Reassessment

The Etymology of Maynila: A Linguistic and Geographic Reassessment

 By Amir Emmanuel 

Introduction

The etymology of Maynila (modern-day Manila) has been the subject of debate among historians, linguists, and cultural scholars. The city’s name, as it is known today, appears to be a Hispanized or evolved form of an older indigenous term. While widely accepted explanations propose that Maynila derives from either the nilad plant or the Sanskrit word nilā (indigo), a more linguistically and geographically coherent theory suggests that Maynila originates from Maydila, meaning “at the tongue” in Tagalog.

This paper examines the competing theories regarding the origin of Maynila, analyzing their linguistic feasibility and historical plausibility. It argues that Maynila as a corruption of Maydila—a reference to the tongue-like land formation near the Pasig River—offers a more consistent explanation within the framework of Philippine place-naming conventions and phonetic evolution.

The Nilad Theory: A Romanticized Etymology

One of the most popular explanations for the name Maynila is that it comes from nilad, a local mangrove shrub (Scyphiphora hydrophyllacea) that grows in brackish water and coastal areas. Early Spanish chroniclers, including Emma Helen Blair, recorded that nilad was a plant found along the shores of Manila Bay and suggested that the city’s name may have derived from the phrase "May Nilad" (“There is nilad”).

However, despite the appeal of this explanation, there are significant linguistic inconsistencies. The main issue lies in the phonetic transformation from nilad to Maynila. In Tagalog, the final consonant d in nilad would not naturally disappear in standard phonetic evolution. If the name had indeed come from nilad, one would expect it to retain its final consonant, resulting in Maynilad rather than Maynila. Furthermore, nilad was never recorded as a highly significant plant in pre-colonial Manila, and there is little direct evidence linking it to the original name of the settlement.

Additionally, the phrase May nilad itself sounds unnatural in Tagalog. In the structure of native place names, the phrase may (“there is”) is typically followed by a noun that describes a geographic or cultural feature, such as Maypajo (“There is pajo [a type of tree]”) or Mayhaligue (“There is haligue [wooden posts]”). If the name Maynila truly originated from nilad, one would expect the grammatical construction to follow a pattern closer to Maynilad rather than Maynila.

The Nilā Theory: An Overextended Sanskrit Connection

A second theory proposes that Maynila is derived from the Sanskrit word nilā, which means “blue” or “indigo.” This theory suggests that Maynila may have been named after the dye-producing nilā plant (Indigofera tinctoria), which was a valuable commodity in Southeast Asian trade. Sanskrit words influenced many Philippine languages through early trade and religious contact, especially via Malay intermediaries, and it is not implausible that some foreign linguistic elements made their way into local toponyms.

However, a major issue with this theory is that in Tagalog, the word for indigo is tayum, not nilā. If the name Maynila were truly based on the concept of indigo dye, it would have been more likely to follow the structure of Maytayum or Tayuman (as seen in the place name Tayuman in modern Manila). Additionally, Kapampangan, which had significant linguistic influence over the northern parts of Manila before Spanish colonization (with the Pasig River as its boundary), uses tayum rather than nilā to refer to indigo.

This raises a fundamental question: if Maynila truly derived from nilā, why did local linguistic patterns not reflect this term? In contrast, other Philippine place names that reference colors or dye-making processes, such as Tayuman (a place associated with indigo dyeing), use the indigenous term tayum. The absence of nilā in the native lexicon undermines the credibility of this etymology.

The Maydila Hypothesis: A Geographically and Linguistically Coherent Explanation

A more convincing etymology for Maynila is that it originates from "Maydila", meaning “at the tongue” in Tagalog. According to Alexander Salt, the word dila translates to “tongue,” and it is plausible that this name was originally a geographic descriptor referring to the tongue-like shape of the land where Manila was established. This would align with the way indigenous peoples often named places based on their geographic features. 

1. Geographic Justification: The Tongue-Like Landform

Manila is located at the mouth of the Pasig River, which feeds into Manila Bay. The area where early settlements formed was shaped by the river’s flow, creating a land formation that jutted out into the bay—resembling a tongue. In Philippine naming conventions, it was common to describe places based on their physical characteristics, as seen in:

 • Navotas (from butas, meaning “hole” or “gap”)

 • Cavite (from kawit, meaning “hook”) 

 • Cebu (from sugbu, referring to burnt land or the act of burning)

 • Muntinlupa (meaning “little land” or “small soil area”)

Given this pattern, Maydila as “the place of the tongue” makes logical sense as a descriptor of the landform at the mouth of the Pasig River.

2. Linguistic Evolution: The Loss of “D” in Maydila

The transformation from Maydila to Maynila follows a common phonetic pattern in Tagalog, where certain consonants are softened or dropped over time. This phonetic simplification can be observed in various Philippine place names, where sounds are altered for ease of pronunciation. The omission of the 'd' in Maydila aligns with this pattern, making Maynila a natural linguistic evolution.

Additionally, Spanish colonial phonetic influence may have contributed to this transformation. Early Spanish records often reflect approximations of indigenous names, modifying their pronunciation to fit Spanish phonology. This process likely played a role in the shift from Maydila to Maynila and eventually to the modern form Manila.

Conclusion: A Reassessment of the Name’s Origins 

While the nilad and nilā theories have been widely circulated, both present linguistic and historical inconsistencies. The nilad theory fails to account for the unexplained phonetic change from nilad to Maynila, while the nilā theory overlooks the fact that the indigenous term for indigo was tayum, not nilā. 

In contrast, the Maydila hypothesis aligns with both linguistic patterns and geographic naming conventions in the Philippines. The land formation at the mouth of the Pasig River naturally resembles a tongue, making Maydila a descriptive and logical name for the area. The phonetic simplification from Maydila to Maynila follows established linguistic shifts observed in other Philippine place names. 

Thus, it is most reasonable to conclude that Maynila is a linguistic corruption of Maydila, shaped over centuries by local phonetic evolution and Spanish colonial adaptation. This explanation not only adheres to indigenous naming conventions but also offers a geographically sound and linguistically plausible account of how Manila came to be called Maynila. 

References

Blair, E. H. (1903). The Philippine Islands. Vol. 29. Cleveland: Arthur H. Clark Company. Potet, Jean-Paul G., A Grammatical Pandect of Written Tagalog. Printing: 2024-12-24. Pang, A. (1972). Philippine Vocabulary and Etymology. Manila: Philippine Educational Publishing Company. 
Peralta, Jesus T.; Salazar, Lucila A. (1974). Pre-Spanish Manila: A Reconstruction of the Pre-history of Manila. National Historical Commission. 
Reid, L. (2009). Tagalog and Philippine Historical Linguistics. Canberra: Australian National University Press. 

The Curse of Ignorance and Malice in Leadership

The Curse of Ignorance and Malice in Leadership

Leadership is a delicate balance of competence and integrity, and the absence of either often leads to catastrophic consequences. Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa once remarked, “It is better to be ignorant but pure of heart than intelligent with malicious intent.” Meanwhile, English writer Samuel Johnson offered a more nuanced perspective: “Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless, while knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful.” These statements capture two sides of a debate about the traits society values—or tolerates—in its leaders. Yet, both leave unanswered the question of what happens when leaders lack both competence and moral integrity, a combination that is far too common in politics. 

Dela Rosa’s sentiment appears to romanticize ignorance, suggesting that a leader’s good intentions can compensate for their lack of knowledge or ability. While this perspective may hold some appeal in an idealized world, it is dangerously naïve in practice. Governance requires more than good intentions—it demands competence, expertise, and strategic thinking. Ignorance in leadership often leads to weak, misguided policies that fail to address systemic issues. Worse still, Dela Rosa’s statement has had the unfortunate effect of turning people into fools, encouraging them to believe that ignorance is excusable in public service. This narrative conveniently ignores the reality that Dela Rosa himself contributed to. 

Dela Rosa is no innocent bystander in the failures of leadership. As a former police chief and now a senator, he was a staunch defender of former President Rodrigo Duterte and his soiled legacy. The bloody “war on drugs,” a cornerstone of Duterte’s administration, left thousands dead, fostered a culture of impunity, and drew widespread condemnation for human rights abuses. In defending Duterte, Dela Rosa not only perpetuated this dark legacy but also betrayed the public trust by aligning himself with policies that prioritized fear over justice. 

Ironically, Duterte attempted to cast himself in the mold of the late Senator Jose Avelino, known for his brutal honesty about the nature of power. Duterte once declared that he was willing to go to hell “so that people will live in paradise.” This echoes Avelino’s infamous remark: 

“Why did you have to order an investigation, Honorable Mr. President? If you cannot prevent abuses, you must at least tolerate them. What are we in power for? We are not hypocrites. Why should we pretend to be saints when, in reality, we are not? We are not angels. When we die, we will all go to hell. It is better to be in hell because in that place, there are no investigations, no secretary of justice, no secretary of the interior to go after us.” 

Duterte, much like Avelino, framed his actions as a necessary evil, suggesting that his willingness to embrace damnation was a sacrifice for the greater good. However, this self-styled martyrdom collapses under scrutiny. Far from leading to a “paradise” for the Filipino people, Duterte’s tenure deepened societal divisions, fostered lawlessness, and left behind a trail of broken families and communities. His invocation of hell as a refuge for the corrupt and the bold only underscores the cynicism that permeated his administration. 

This scenario highlights the devastating consequences of combining ignorance with malicious intent. Leaders who lack the knowledge to govern effectively but possess the willingness to enable harmful policies are doubly dangerous. Their actions not only fail to solve societal problems but actively create new ones. The damage inflicted during Dela Rosa’s tenure as police chief and Duterte’s presidency serves as a stark reminder of this dynamic, as communities were left grappling with violence, fear, and a weakened rule of law. 

The phenomenon of leaders feigning purity while engaging in corruption is particularly troubling. It reflects a society that values image over substance, allowing mediocrity and malice to thrive under the guise of respectability. As some have noted, “A fool who pretends to be clean is the worst kind of fool.” Such leaders undermine the very foundations of governance, eroding trust in institutions and perpetuating cycles of injustice. 

Yet Avelino’s candid acknowledgment of political realities also serves as a warning. His words challenge citizens to confront the uncomfortable truths about power and its abuses. While his cynicism might seem like a justification for wrongdoing, it also highlights the urgency of demanding more from those in authority. 

To break free from this cycle of ignorance and malice, societies must demand leadership that embodies both competence and integrity. Knowledge without integrity breeds exploitation, while integrity without knowledge leads to ineffectiveness. True leadership requires a balance of both—a commitment to public service grounded in expertise and ethical principles. Anything less is an affront to the responsibilities of governance and a betrayal of the public trust. 

Ultimately, the combination of ignorance and malice is a curse upon any nation. It erodes the fabric of society, leaving citizens disillusioned and institutions weakened. Leaders must be held accountable, not just for their intentions but for their actions and their results. Avelino’s grim honesty, Duterte’s hollow promises, and Dela Rosa’s enabling of abuses serve as a collective warning and a call to action: the time has come to stop excusing incompetence and corruption and to demand leadership that is capable, just, and truly worthy of the people’s mandate. 

As Drones Washed Over in Masbate's Shores – A Call for Self-Reliance in Philippine Defense

As Drones Washed Over in Masbate's Shores –

A Call for Self-Reliance in Philippine Defense

The recent recovery of foreign drones off the coast of Masbate, including a suspected Chinese submarine drone in 2025 and a US aerial target drone in 2012, highlights more than just the country’s geographical significance. It underscores a critical reality: the Philippines remains caught between global superpowers, reliant on their advanced technology, and vulnerable to their geopolitical maneuvering.

Rather than viewing these events as isolated incidents, they should serve as a wake-up call. The discovery of these drones presents an opportunity for the Philippines to reflect on its defense capabilities and its overreliance on foreign nations. If the country is serious about securing its sovereignty and strengthening its national defense, it must take bold steps toward self-reliance and innovation.

The Masbate Drones: Missed Opportunities?

The recovery of drones in Masbate highlights the technological disparities between the Philippines and the superpowers operating in its waters. The Chinese HY-119 submarine drone, equipped with sophisticated navigation and reconnaissance capabilities, demonstrates a level of technological advancement that the Philippines can only aspire to.

Similarly, the US BQM-74E aerial target drone recovered in 2012, though not as advanced as the Chinese drone, still provided a glimpse into the operational practices of a global military power. Both drones represent opportunities to learn, adapt, and innovate.

Unfortunately, the country’s traditional response to such discoveries has been to hand them over to their respective countries of origin or store them as mere displays. While these actions may maintain diplomatic ties, they do little to address the Philippines’ glaring technological gap.

The Problem with Dismissing “Made in China”

It is not uncommon for people to dismiss Chinese-made technology as inferior, often ridiculing it as “fake” or “frustrated copies” of American counterparts. These criticisms are frequently laced with ideological biases, reducing Chinese advancements to nothing more than products of a “commie” regime that has to be maligned.

However, such oversimplifications ignore an essential truth: China’s modernization, particularly in the realm of military technology, was facilitated in part by the West. The United States and its allies, through decades of economic and technological cooperation, helped lay the groundwork for the innovations we now see emerging from China.

The Chinese drone found in Masbate, marked “HY-119,” is not just a random object. It represents the culmination of years of focused investment in research, development, and strategic thinking. Instead of dismissing it as inferior, the Philippines should study it and recognize the significance of China’s technological leap.

The lesson here is clear: rather than mocking the progress of others, the Philippines must ask itself why it has remained technologically dependent. More importantly, it must decide how it can break free from this cycle.

Learning from Taiwan’s Example

The Philippines can draw valuable lessons from its northern neighbor, Taiwan, which has become a model of resilience and innovation in defense. Despite facing constant threats from China, Taiwan has built one of the most advanced and self-reliant defense industries in the region. Its indigenous missile systems, drones, and naval technologies rival those of global powers, demonstrating the potential of strategic investment and long-term planning.

Taiwan’s achievements stem from consistent investment in research and development, as seen in its domestically developed Hsiung Feng missile systems, Sky Bow missile defense systems, and advanced naval fleet. These innovations have allowed Taiwan to maintain a credible deterrent against a far larger adversary. Moreover, Taiwan prioritizes nurturing local talent and fostering public-private partnerships, creating a thriving ecosystem of scientists, engineers, and manufacturers contributing to its defense capabilities. By promoting a culture of innovation and focusing on asymmetrical warfare strategies, Taiwan has maximized its strengths, developing swarming drones, mobile missile systems, and small, highly capable naval vessels tailored to its security needs.

The Philippines, by contrast, remains heavily reliant on foreign military assistance and secondhand equipment, which limits its ability to address its defense requirements independently. Drawing inspiration from Taiwan, the Philippines could take significant steps to build its own robust defense industry by investing in research and development, fostering collaboration between universities, private industries, and the military, and encouraging local innovation.

Taiwan’s example proves that even under severe external pressure, a nation can develop formidable capabilities when it prioritizes self-reliance and ingenuity. For the Philippines, adopting this approach would mean reducing its dependency on foreign powers and asserting greater control over its defense posture. If Taiwan can succeed under more challenging circumstances, there is no reason why the Philippines cannot follow a similar path to secure its sovereignty and protect its interests.

Why Not Study and Reverse Engineer?

Rather than treating these drones as foreign debris, the Philippines should view them as rare opportunities to understand modern military systems. Reverse engineering, a practice used by nations like China and India to develop their own technologies, could be a game-changer for the country.

By carefully studying these drones, Filipino engineers and scientists could gain insights into navigation systems, surveillance technologies, and other critical components. These learnings could form the basis for developing indigenous drones, naval equipment, and communication systems tailored to the country’s needs.

The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) has made strides in defense modernization, but much of its equipment remains outdated or imported. Locally developed drones, while promising, are still rudimentary compared to the sophisticated technologies displayed by the Chinese and US drones. Studying these recovered devices could help bridge that gap.

Breaking Free from Dependency

For decades, the Philippines has relied on foreign powers for its defense needs, often receiving hand-me-downs or secondhand equipment. While these arrangements have provided short-term solutions, they have perpetuated a dependency that undermines the country’s sovereignty.

The Philippines’ position as a key player in the Pacific has made it a pawn in the geopolitical strategies of global powers. The discovery of the Chinese drone underscores the tensions between Manila and Beijing over the South China Sea, while the US drone highlights the Philippines’ continued reliance on American military support.

To break free from this cycle, the Philippines must take ownership of its defense capabilities. This means investing in local research and development, fostering partnerships between universities and the military, and creating opportunities for Filipino talent to thrive.

A Path to Self-Reliance

Self-reliance in defense is not just about technology; it is about asserting national sovereignty and pride. The Philippines has the talent and resources to build a stronger and more independent defense posture. What it needs is the political will and strategic vision to make it happen.

The drones recovered in Masbate are more than just technological curiosities – they are symbols of opportunity. They remind the Philippines of its vulnerabilities, but they also highlight its potential.

If the country is serious about strengthening its defense capabilities, it cannot afford to let these opportunities slip away. It is time for the Philippines to reflect, rethink, and act. Self-reliance is not a distant dream; it is a necessity. The question now is whether the Philippines will rise to the challenge or continue to rely on others to secure its future.