ShareThis
June 18, 2010
According to an undocumented historical statement, the first Filipinos who ever landed in American soil were compulsory sailors during the Manila-Acapulco Galleon trade from 1565 through 1815. They landed on the shores of California to claim the land for the Spanish king as agents of Spain’s economic expansion, technically tagged as colonization (the system of forcefully usurping the resources of other lands without due process). USA was not yet a sovereign state at that time. The second horde of Filipinos arrived in the 1900’s with an alleged intention to acquire wealth and go back home. This group could probably be considered as motivated by monetary gains, an apparent intent for economic development. Nonetheless, since their earnings as hired farmers and croppers were low, a trip back home would not have justified this intent. It was probably the beginning of an unofficial immigration to the United States of America.
During and after World War II, the third wave of Filipino immigrants was focused on military recruits, enlisted to battle against the “opponents” of democracy. In the same way that Spain used the Filipinos for their own commercial purposes, the American used us for their own imperial pursuits. The difference between the former and the latter is that of a free choice.
As years passed and the Philippines improved, the fourth wave of Filipinos were officially invited as residents with professional positions and academic degrees, able to contribute to a nation’s economic opulence. They could be considered factors of Economic development, but not for the Philippines. They kept their families. They kept their money. Remittances were not yet in style.
It is probably the fifth, sixth or seventh batch that could officially be claimed as immigrants who truly sought grass with greener pastures. It was at this time that the “brain drain” allegedly started with individuals who could have made it at home yet sought something better elsewhere. When other countries got richer and the Philippines became poorer, our immigrants migrated mostly out of desperation. Filipinos left to survive and thereby grabbed whatever job there is available: care givers, baby sitters, domestic help, strippers, dancers and other forms of entertainers. It is at this point that remittances to the Philippines exponentially grew, a paradoxical reality of poverty- seeking- remedy- providing-help-promoting wealth series that marked international abuses, controversies, and political debacles. It is also at this phase that the term TNT became a fad among those whose legal documents expired.
All these waves of Filipino Diaspora are only a segment that does not include the history of Filipino migratory patterns in all the other continents of the world. It is partly because of this that a debate on a Filipino blagosphere argues issues as to whether the newly elected President Noynoy Aquino should focus on the eradication of corruption first before economic development or should it be economic development first before anything else.
It is a common underlying factor that the migratory patterns of all living beings are primordially based on the instinct of survival. The top five percent of the wealthiest individuals from the poorest nations will have no reason to migrate to other places. Although they may own real estate in other lands besides their birthplace, it is not common to witness this kind of individual lining up for a green card. And even if they had one, it is not common to see them pledging as citizens of the United States. The argument here is that when wealth is abundant in any country of origin, the reasons for a citizen to leave that country and be a citizen of another are highly reduced. If there were enough wealth properly allocated among a wider spectrum of the population, it could be probable that there would be less Filipino immigrants in the US and Filipino workers in other countries of the world. In more simple terms, if there were more jobs in the Philippines producing living wage compensation, there would probably be less reasons for Filipinos to leave home and wander all over the world. When there is economic abundance, there will be more jobs. And when there are more jobs at home, there will be less need to leave home. When there are less immigrants coming over, a Comprehensive Immigration reform could be more solvable and less complex.
In the Philippines, we have the added pain of systemic corruption, a deterrent for foreign investors to infuse capital and create employment. Without capital or employment, there are no jobs. And when there are no jobs, there will be no pay checks, and no circulation of monetary resources to sustain an economic stability. On the other side, with abundance, there would be no need for bribery, there could be less graft and there could even have lesser corruption. Determining the primary position between the two is akin to the classic question of the chicken or the egg.
After careful thought, I opine that the only way to attack corruption back home is not by a direct assault but through the emphasis on our values as Filipinos. With less corruption, economic abundance could be easily attracted or created. The ability to attract or create it could make it possible for us to survive whatever hurdles might come our way. If and when the Philippines reaches a level of economic comfort, then such a comfort could perhaps indirectly solve the issues on the comprehensive immigration reform directly affecting the Filipinos. Yet, if indeed the Philippines reaches economic abundance, does this entail lesser Filipino immigrants? Probably not. Apart from the instinct of survival, there are other reasons that explain why immigrants exist and persist. Those who come from geographically smaller countries will tend to expand and migrate more that those whose environment provides a larger space. Self expansion and realization could be another reason. A search for family identity could be another.
If ever America deletes its own debts and keeps its promise of helping those countries it damaged during war through commercial partnership instead of defense, the flow of immigrants could have an altered definition. In this case, the resurrection of an American Economic Abundance will probably not even care about the illegal
distribution of labor. As long as no crimes are involved, they probably might even have a wider door. Likewise, if there is an economic prosperity back home, the overall tendency for people to leave would be less.