The Tyranny of “Po and Opo”: On Language, Deference, and the Filipino Soul

When “Opo” Was Earned, Not Expected

Once upon a time—not in the mythic mists of Malakas and Maganda but in our very own childhoods—respect was an act, not a reflex. We kissed the hands of our lolos and lolas, we offered them the best seat, we fetched water from the tap or basin, and we spoke when spoken to. We said "opo" not out of habit but because it reflected our respect for those who lived longer, loved deeper, and suffered more.

Today, as a professor at the University of the Philippines, I stand before a classroom of young Filipinos—most born in the age of YouTube and TikTok—and am met with a cascade of “po’s” and “opo’s,” sometimes three per sentence. “Yes, Sir po,” they say. “I’ll submit it po. Tomorrow po, promise po.” Each “po” a thud of obedience, a genuflection not of the body but of the tongue.

Tenants of a Feudal House

I have grown wary of these verbal curtsies. There’s something hauntingly ironic about it: the more polite they sound, the less they seem to rebel. These are the same generations that speak of safe spaces and gender fluidity, that embrace the digital and demand transparency—and yet, in language, they are still tenants of a feudal house. There is in them a fear of the slip—a fear that omitting “po” might cause offense, as though their elders were gods waiting to be slighted.

Even my colleagues in UP—professional equals, though younger—address me with “po” and “opo” in conversations where a simple “Sir” would more than suffice. It is a quiet, habitual gesture of deference that borders on the excessive, and though I do not take offense, I find it mildly annoying. For in an institution where we are encouraged to engage as equals in discourse, the ritualistic language of hierarchy feels oddly out of place.

From Martial Roars to Mumbled “Po”s

But we, the children of the sixties and seventies—we who marched in the First Quarter Storm, who rallied beneath the ghostly lights of the Diliman Commune—our deference was conditional. We said “opo” to our grandparents, never to Marcos. We honored tradition, but challenged tyranny. We spoke softly in the sala, and roared in the streets.

Why this shift? Why does today’s youth and young adults couch rebellion in euphemism and cover independence in pleasantries?

To be fair, they did not invent this language. “Po” and “opo” are old. Pre-Hispanic, some say, but crystallized under Spain and formalized under American pedagogy. Spanish friars taught us humility; American schoolmasters drilled us in grammar; both gave us religion and rules. And out of this emerged the Filipino formal: a smile, a bow, a soft voice, a thousand po’s.

And yet, language is not merely the servant of manners. It is the mirror of the soul. And a society that cannot say “no” without a “po” may find it hard to say “never” when it must.

Rituals Without Reverence

Still, let us be just. This linguistic politesse is not ours alone. The Japanese bow in grammar as they do in gesture; the Koreans suffix their verbs in submission; the Thais end each sentence with a sweet “kráp” or “ká.” But what makes Filipino po distinct is its frequency, its fusing with the colonial “Sir” and “Ma’am,” its use not just with elders but even with equals—sometimes, heartbreakingly, even with the undeserving.

What we are witnessing, perhaps, is not reverence but ritual. The performance of respect, not its practice. A politeness that obscures thought, not sharpens it.

And so I have made it my quiet mission in class: to tell my students that “Sir” is enough. That “po” need not be a comma in every sentence. That real respect lies not in how you speak to authority, but in how you speak truth to it.

Because I dream of a Filipino who can disagree and still be decent, who can question and still be kind. Who need not grovel to be heard. Who will not be less Filipino for saying “Yes, Sir” without the crutches of colonial politeness.

A Voice Unburdened, A Nation Unbowed

And perhaps—only perhaps—when that day comes, we will finally find the voice that is not burdened by the past, but buoyed by the future. A voice neither raised in rage nor lowered in fear. But lifted, clear and firm, like the cry of a nation unshackled from habit, but never from heart.

For it is only when we stop mistaking deference for dignity, and politeness for principle, that we may begin to speak as a people truly free—not just from colonizers, but from the quiet chains we clasp around our own tongues. Only then can the Filipino say “yes” and mean it, “no” and stand by it, and “opo”—only when it matters most.

The Post-Xi Puzzle: Power, Peril, and the Future of China

As the world watches China's every move, one question increasingly preoccupies analysts and observers: what will happen when Xi Jinping steps aside? Whether due to retirement, health issues, or internal political pressures, the departure of China's most powerful leader in decades would trigger significant shifts both within the country and beyond. 

Xi has extended his rule beyond the typical two terms and consolidated power to a degree not seen since Mao Zedong. Institutions that once provided some semblance of collective leadership have been weakened or marginalized. In their place stands a leader who has instilled in the Communist Party heightened ideological control, personal loyalty, and a top-down governance style that sidelines dissent and rewards conformity.

No Clear Successor

The Communist Party exists with a heavy dose of ideological power and personal loyalty. However, this same concentration of power raises a troubling question: without Xi at the helm, will the system bend or break?

There is no clear successor. Unlike Deng Xiaoping, who signaled his successors years in advance, Xi has given no formal indication of a transition plan. This opens the door to factional infighting. 

Some likely contenders are technocrats with strong records in economic management, while others are political hardliners or military-backed figures. The outcome largely depends on whether Xi appoints a successor or leaves a vacuum that rival factions scramble to fill.

Recalibration of China's Domestic and International Policy

A change in leadership could recalibrate both domestic and international policy. Domestically, China might shift away from overregulation, surveillance, and the aggressive anti-corruption campaigns that have chilled private enterprise. 

Internationally, a new leader could soften or double down on Beijing's stance on Taiwan, the South China Sea, and its often contentious relationship with Washington.

To be sure, a leadership transition carries significant risks. Without Xi's towering authority, latent divisions within the Party could erupt. Economic volatility, military assertiveness, or social unrest may rise in a country already facing demographic challenges and slowing growth. A smooth transition is possible, but it's not guaranteed.

Implications for the Philippines

For the Philippines, the departure of Xi Jinping could herald both strategic uncertainty and potential opportunity. Under Xi, China’s increasingly assertive maritime posture—particularly in the West Philippine Sea—has tested Manila’s diplomatic agility, forcing it to navigate between resisting Chinese encroachment and preserving vital economic ties. 

A leadership transition in Beijing could lead to a temporary recalibration or even fragmentation of China’s foreign policy, which may open diplomatic windows for the Philippines to reinforce its legal claims, strengthen maritime security, and adjust its defense partnerships, especially with the United States, Japan, and Australia. 

However, if power in China shifts to nationalist or military hardliners, Manila could face heightened pressure, economic coercion, or escalated maritime provocations. The Philippines must therefore pursue a flexible but firm foreign policy that hedges against uncertainty, bolsters regional alliances, invests in defense modernization, and asserts sovereignty through international law and multilateral diplomacy. 

 Conclusion

The post-Xi era holds the potential either to defuse long-standing tensions or to heighten strategic risks—outcomes that will hinge on the nature of China’s next leadership and its geopolitical posture in Southeast Asia. As the nation transitions beyond Xi Jinping's dominant rule, it stands at a pivotal crossroads: the path of institutional renewal and stability, or the perilous slide into factionalism and political volatility. What lies in the balance is far more than the legacy of one man—it is the future trajectory of a global superpower whose actions will continue to shape the course of the 21st century.

References

Buckley, C. (2022, October 15). As Xi tightens his grip on power, China's elite keep their heads down. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/15/world/asia/china-xi-jinping-party-congress.html

Economy, E. C. (2022). The world according to China. Polity Press.

Feng, E. (2023, March 8). Xi Jinping's long shadow: How his leadership changed China forever. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2023/03/08/1161972345/xi-jinping-china-leadership

Li, C. (2023). Xi Jinping's third term and the future of China's political succession. Brookings Institution. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/xi-jinpings-third-term-and-the-future-of-chinas-political-succession/

Miller, T. (2023). China's economic reckoning: The struggle for reform and stability under Xi. Council on Foreign Relations Press.

Pillsbury, M. (2015). The hundred-year marathon: China's secret strategy to replace America as the global superpower. Henry Holt and Company.

Shirk, S. L. (2022). Overreach: How China derailed its peaceful rise. Oxford University Press.

Storey, I. (2022). The South China Sea disputes: Implications for Southeast Asia's maritime security. ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute.

The Nine Votes That Could Save Sara Duterte: An Analysis of the Impeachment Landscape

Blogger's Note: This is a developing story indeed. The day before I published this blog, the political landscape shifted dramatically when the Philippine Senate, on June 10, 2025, voted 18–5 to return the articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte to the House of Representatives. This move effectively halted the impeachment process before a trial could begin, reflecting either procedural doubts or a broader unwillingness among senators to escalate the issue. As a result, the dynamics analyzed in this blog—particularly the composition and influence of the potential acquittal bloc—remain relevant not in anticipation of a trial, but as a demonstration of Duterte’s prevailing clout within the Senate and her potential resilience heading into 2028.

As the Philippine Senate braces for the landmark impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, political observers are focusing not just on the allegations at hand but on the evolving alliances and ideological loyalties that will shape the outcome. 

While the House of Representatives secured the necessary one-third vote to transmit the articles of impeachment, the Senate holds the decisive power: a two-thirds vote (16 of 24 senators) is required to convict and remove Duterte from office. 

However, the emerging landscape reveals that the opposition may face an insurmountable wall—formed by a reliable bloc of nine senators ready to vote for acquittal.

The Core: Duterte’s Inner Circle in the Senate

At the center of the anticipated acquittal bloc are seven senators who owe their political fortunes, loyalty, or ideological affinity to the Duterte name.

1. Senator Christopher “Bong” Go, a former close aide and personal confidant of President Rodrigo Duterte, is arguably the most predictable vote. His political identity is intertwined with the Duterte brand.

2. Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa, Duterte’s former PNP chief and architect of the controversial war on drugs, shares not just loyalty but ideological alignment with the Dutertes.

3. Senator Imee Marcos, sister of President Bongbong Marcos, is a vital political ally in the UniTeam coalition. Though factionalism exists between the Marcos and Duterte camps, Imee has been a vocal defender of the Duterte legacy, and her vote would likely prioritize coalition preservation over intra-alliance rivalry.

4. Senator Robin Padilla, an unapologetic supporter of Duterte’s hardline policies, often positions himself as a cultural nationalist and aligns with populist rhetoric.

5. Senator Alan Peter Cayetano, despite past tensions with Duterte, has consistently aligned with administration positions when it mattered. His calculated independence is more performative than oppositional.

6. Senator Camille Villar, beneficiary of Duterte endorsements and scion of a powerful political clan with deep ties to the administration, has shown no signs of breaking with Duterte-aligned interests.

7. Senator Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, though a veteran centrist, has demonstrated political pragmatism and historical alignment with populist leaderships. While not an automatic vote, his inclination leans toward institutional preservation and political moderation—which in this case may mean avoiding destabilization through conviction.

The Marginal Votes: Swinging from Caution to Calculus

To achieve the critical ninth vote that can block a two-thirds majority, two more names are frequently cited:

1. Senator Pia Cayetano, sister of Alan Peter and part of the UniTeam slate in 2022, is unlikely to vote against Sara Duterte unless compelled by a seismic political realignment or public outcry. Her brand of technocratic centrism does not typically translate into bold political defiance.

2. Senator Lito Lapid, known for his reticence and low-profile senatorial style, typically follows the path of least resistance—often favoring administration stability and the prevailing power center.

Their roles are pivotal. Even if one of them wavers, conviction becomes mathematically possible. If both hold the line, impeachment fails.

The Larger Implication: A Referendum on Duterte Power

This trial is not merely a legal proceeding—it is a political litmus test on the durability of the Duterte machinery and the recalibration of post-2022 power dynamics.

On one hand, the impeachment drive may be viewed as a coordinated maneuver by rival factions—possibly from within the Marcos camp—to curtail Sara Duterte’s momentum ahead of 2028. If so, the Senate trial becomes a symbolic battlefield between continuity and reconfiguration within the UniTeam coalition itself.

On the other hand, if Sara Duterte survives with the help of this coalition, it will reaffirm the enduring gravitational pull of the Duterte name, not just among voters, but among power brokers and legislators wary of alienating a potent political force. 

A failed impeachment will likely allow her to cast herself as a persecuted leader, rallying the Duterte base while expanding her appeal as a stabilizing figure—ironically mirroring her father's playbook from the 2016 campaign.

Strategic Forecast: What Could Shift the Math?

Despite the current count favoring Duterte, several developments could alter the trajectory:

1. Public opinion shocks—such as a corruption scandal gaining traction or a mass mobilization of civil society—could prompt swing senators to reconsider.

2. Executive pressure from the Marcos administration, especially if it chooses to burn bridges with Duterte, could force moderate senators to toe the line.

3. Backroom deals and political horse-trading, as is common in Philippine politics, may reshape voting patterns—especially if administration largesse or favors are dangled in exchange for allegiance.

However, as it stands, the acquittal bloc appears cohesive, and unless cracks emerge due to either miscalculation or crisis, Sara Duterte is poised to survive the Senate vote.

Conclusion: A Trial of the Philippine Political Architecture

This impeachment is not just a reckoning with legality or misconduct—it is a trial of the political architecture in the Philippines. The nine votes that could save Sara Duterte represent more than individual senators; they reflect entrenched political loyalties, the inertia of traditional alliances, and the cost of confronting dynastic power.

If the impeachment is blocked, it will reinforce the notion that accountability in Philippine politics is often secondary to survival and strategic alignment. Yet paradoxically, it may also galvanize opposition forces, reframe Sara Duterte as the political heir apparent, and set the stage for an even more polarized 2028 contest.

We and the Flood

We and the Flood

By Roberto E. Reyes

1V-1

Blogger's Note: This is an article I wrote in 1971 (when I was 16 years old) for The Scale, the then official publication of Judge Juan Luna High School (JJLHS). I was its editor-in-chief. Please pardon any grammatical errors. I am republishing it as is, or without any editing. 

The flood has once more demonstrated to our people its awesome destructive power. And to say the least, unexpectedly. It did so rather easily as the Filipino who was caught flat-footed watched helplessly. Our leaders did not even know where to get the rescue facilities much less stop the rampaging angry waters. Succor came as usual mostly from the private sector and except for the few who would rather remain anonymous, people with selfish motives extended a helping hand for political and publicity purposes.

With Luzon including Manila and the suburbs still recovering from the ravages of the last deluge, our President and the mayor of Manila have again started cutting at each other’s throat, exchanges charges and counter-charges. President Marcos has asked Congress to appropriate 200 million pesos for the construction of a drainage system to end all floods. In doing so he deviated from his usual practice of creating a super committee after every calamity, hence, he contrived this plan. On the other hand, Mayor Villegas more sarcastically than serious, stated that provided with the needed logistics he will construct a drainage system in his city to last for generations. He blamed Malacañang for its refusal to release money due to the city to be used in his ambitious program.

Be that as it may, we have yet to witness these men’s golden words converted into genuine, concrete accomplishments. Meanwhile, the flood shall continue unabatedly to bring havoc on this poor land for more years to come and a solution has yet to be found. Always we would hear from our government officials grandiose programs of flood control only to see them dissipate as soon as the waters had gone and the first ray of the sun from the east shall have shown itself.

Isn’t there any end in sight to all this nonsense? Why don’t we for once face the real problem with a sincere plan? Haven’t we learned our lesson from the sad past?

It is high time that we roll up our sleeves and start working. Otherwise, the next victim may be you and I. And that may be too late.

Impeachment Because of Numbers: How Sara Duterte’s 32 Million Votes Made Her a Target

In a country where elections are supposed to be sacred expressions of the people’s will, the move to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte reeks not of justice but of political strategy. In the May 9, 2022 vice-presidential election, she received 32,208,417 votes—the highest number ever recorded by any candidate in a single-winner nationwide Philippine election. 

That staggering mandate, backed by over 61% of the electorate, instantly made her the most formidable contender for the presidency in 2028. And that is precisely why some political forces want her out—not because she has committed a grave offense, but because she stands in the way of their chosen candidate.

Let’s be clear: the Constitution outlines specific, serious grounds for impeachment—culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, and graft and corruption. But in Sara Duterte’s case, no such grave offense has been proven. 

What’s being marshaled instead is political theater—designed to inflame headlines, trigger public doubt, and damage her standing early in the electoral cycle. If this pattern takes root, it sends a chilling message: popularity and electoral strength may make you more likely, not less, to be punished.

It is no coincidence that this impeachment push is emerging from circles aligned with other presidential hopefuls. The numbers don’t lie. In 2022, Sara Duterte not only won—she crushed her closest rivals, Francis Pangilinan and Tito Sotto, with the largest vote count in Philippine history. Rather than risk an electoral loss in 2028, her rivals seem more inclined to remove her from contention altogether, using Congress as a political sledgehammer.

Worse, those orchestrating this political takedown show an utter contempt for the 32 million Filipinos who voted her into office. In attempting to unseat her through questionable legal means, they are also invalidating the voices of a massive democratic majority. But in doing so, they have awakened a much stronger political force. 

What began as support has become solidarity—what was once a landslide is now a movement. Because of this ongoing political persecution, Sara Duterte is now stronger politically than she was in 2022. Her base has deepened, widened, and hardened in response to what they rightfully perceive as an unjust attack.

Even more telling is the Marcos Jr. administration’s quiet accommodation of the International Criminal Court’s pursuit of former President Rodrigo Duterte. Though couched in the language of international cooperation and rule of law, this move is part of the same sinister campaign to besmirch the Duterte name and erode its influence. 

The real target is not the past but the future: Sara Duterte and the 2028 presidential elections. By tarnishing her family’s legacy and entangling it in global legal controversies, this group hopes to discredit her by association and drain support from the most powerful political brand in recent Philippine memory.

The dangers of this trend are far-reaching. If every strong candidate becomes a target for legal annihilation, what remains of our democratic processes? The impeachment mechanism, meant to safeguard the Republic, is now at risk of being reduced to a partisan trapdoor, springing open under anyone deemed inconvenient to the ruling elite or the ambitions of power blocs. This is not a defense of Sara Duterte alone but of fair play, due process, and institutional restraint.

In the end, let the people decide. Let 2028 be a true contest of visions, not a battlefield cleared by procedural sabotage. We must not allow the impeachment process to be weaponized into a preemptive strike against electoral competition. 

Democracy cannot thrive in a climate where popular leaders are politically lynched before the starting whistle. To remove a candidate through impeachment not for wrongdoing, but for being too electable, is a betrayal not just of that person, but of the millions who put their trust in the ballot.

How the Philippines Can Win Big as Companies Leave China

Introduction

The global manufacturing landscape is in a major shakeup—one that’s redefining where and how the world’s goods are made. For decades, China stood at the center of global production, but that dominance is being challenged as multinational companies rethink their strategies in the face of growing risks. 

Trade tensions between China and the West, rising labor costs, and the shockwaves of the COVID-19 pandemic have exposed just how fragile single-source supply chains can be. Add to that the rising geopolitical uncertainty in the Indo-Pacific region, and it’s clear why the “China +1” strategy—diversifying operations to one additional country—has gained traction.

But companies aren’t stopping at just one. To build true resilience and stay competitive, many are now adopting a “China +1+1” approach—spreading their operations across multiple countries to avoid disruption, reduce costs, and respond faster to global demand. This shift isn’t a temporary trend—it’s the future of global manufacturing. 

For emerging economies like the Philippines, this creates a once-in-a-generation opportunity to step up, attract new investments, and carve out a more dynamic role in the international supply chain. The question is no longer if companies are leaving China—it’s where they’re going next, and whether the Philippines is ready to answer the call.

This transition offers the Philippines a golden opportunity—if it can overcome persistent structural challenges and position itself strategically.

 Why “China +1+1” Matters

For years, global companies relied heavily on China as the world’s factory. But trade wars, rising wages, and the chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic made them rethink that dependence. That’s how the “China +1” strategy took off—shifting some operations to countries like Vietnam, India, or Mexico to spread out the risk. It wasn’t about leaving China entirely, but about having a backup plan in a more stable or cost-effective location.

Now we’re seeing the next step: “China +1+1.” Companies aren’t just picking one alternative anymore—they’re building networks across two or more countries to stay flexible and resilient. This strategy helps them manage uncertainty, avoid disruptions, and stay competitive in a fast-changing world. For the Philippines, it’s a rare opening to become part of that new network—if it can prove it’s ready to play a bigger role.

The global supply chain reset won’t wait for anyone—and the Philippines can’t afford to be a bystander. Other countries are moving quickly, improving their systems, cutting red tape, and grabbing investor attention. The good news is that the Philippines has real strengths: a young and tech-savvy workforce, strong English skills, and a strategic location in Asia. 

But those strengths need to be backed by action—better infrastructure, smarter policies, and serious reforms. If the country can rise to the occasion, it won’t just be someone’s “+1+1”—it can be a vital link in the world’s next big supply chain story.

What the Philippines Must Do

1. Upgrade Infrastructure and Logistics

World-class infrastructure is the bedrock of modern industrial economies and a critical magnet for foreign direct investment. The Philippines continues to suffer from chronic infrastructure deficiencies—frequent power outages, inefficient ports, and substandard roads—that drive up logistics costs and frustrate supply chain reliability. While the “Build Better More” program, launched in 2022 as the successor to “Build, Build, Build,” is a commendable initiative, its success hinges on timely, transparent, and corruption-free implementation (Asian Development Bank, 2019). Accelerating infrastructure rollout with a focus on quality, connectivity, and maintenance will significantly enhance the country’s appeal as a manufacturing and logistics hub in the Indo-Pacific.

2. Make Investment Easier and More Attractive

Investors prioritize predictability, speed, and simplicity—and the Philippines still lags in all three. Despite reforms such as the Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service Delivery Act of 2018 and the CREATE Act (which reduced corporate income tax from 30% to 25%), implementation is inconsistent, especially at the local level (World Bank, 2020). A decisive shift toward digital governance, streamlined permitting, and transparent regulatory practices is urgently needed. Lowering friction in the investment process will not only boost confidence but also encourage long-term commitments from global firms seeking to diversify beyond China.

3. Develop a Robust Local Supply Chain

No country can thrive as a manufacturing hub without a dependable and integrated domestic supply chain. The Philippines’ overreliance on imported raw materials—especially in electronics, apparel, and construction—undermines its ability to anchor global value chains (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2025). Strengthening strategic industries such as semiconductors, textiles, and basic metals—through incentives, skills development, and R&D support—can boost backward linkages and reduce vulnerability to external shocks. A well-developed local supplier ecosystem is essential to improving reliability, lowering production costs, and positioning the country as a serious “+1” location.

4. Leverage and Expand Trade Agreements

Trade agreements are not just about access—they are about alignment and long-term strategy. As a founding member of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the Philippines gains reduced tariffs and wider market access across 15 Asia-Pacific economies (ASEAN Briefing, 2023). However, to maximize benefits, the country must strengthen institutional readiness and actively pursue additional bilateral free trade agreements, especially with the EU and India. A robust trade policy, coupled with business education and export support, can integrate the country more deeply into Asia’s expanding production networks.

5. Tackle Long-Standing Challenges

Structural weaknesses, such as corruption, weak institutions, and policy unpredictability, continue to hinder Philippine competitiveness. The country ranked 115th out of 180 in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index in 2023, reflecting ongoing concerns about governance (Transparency International, 2023). These systemic issues elevate business risks and discourage long-term investment. Only through sustained political will, institutional reform, and the promotion of rule-based governance can the Philippines create an environment that attracts and retains global investors.

Conclusion

The world is redrawing its manufacturing map, and the Philippines has a real shot at becoming one of its key destinations—if it moves quickly and decisively. The pieces are already on the table: upgraded infrastructure, simplified regulations, stronger local industries, smart trade diplomacy, and above all, good governance. 

These aren’t just policy suggestions—they’re the foundation of a more competitive, resilient, and inclusive economy. Countries like Vietnam and Indonesia are already making bold moves; the Philippines must do the same, or risk being left behind.

What’s at stake is more than foreign investment—it’s the chance to create better jobs, boost innovation, and give the next generation of Filipinos a meaningful role in the global economy. The “China +1+1” moment won’t last forever, but with vision, political will, and a sense of urgency, the Philippines can turn this global reset into a national breakthrough. The time to act isn’t tomorrow. It’s now.

References

ASEAN Briefing. (2023). Philippines Ratifies RCEP Agreement: Opportunities for Businesses. https://www.aseanbriefing.com/news/philippines-ratifies-rcep-agreement-opportunities-for-businesses/

Asian Development Bank. (2019). Improving Public Infrastructure in the Philippines. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/525971/adr-vol36no2-6-public-infrastructure-philippines.pdf

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2025). Highlights of the Philippine Export and Import. https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/export-import/monthly

Transparency International. (2023). Corruption Perceptions Index 2023. https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2023

World Bank. (2020). Doing business 2020: Comparing business regulation in 190 economies. https://www.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusiness/country/p/philippines/PHL.pdf

Explaining the Growth: A Closer Look at the Philippine Economy in 2025

In 2025, the Philippine economy is garnering attention globally, emerging as one of the most dynamic growth stories amidst global economic uncertainty. With a remarkable projected GDP growth of 6.1%, the country surpasses its Southeast Asian neighbors and even major East Asian powerhouses like China. What lies behind this extraordinary growth?

Firstly, the Philippines benefits immensely from its consumption-driven economy, with domestic spending constituting more than 77% of GDP. Unlike countries heavily reliant on exports, this internal demand shields them effectively from global disruptions, such as trade wars, geopolitical tensions, and supply chain disruptions. The large, youthful, and English-proficient population significantly fuels this robust consumption.

Moreover, remittances from overseas Filipino workers continue to play an essential stabilizing role. In 2024 alone, remittances reached $37 billion, representing about 8% of the GDP, injecting significant buying power into local markets and bolstering economic resilience.

Another critical factor in the Philippines' economic upswing is the government’s ambitious infrastructure initiative, the "Build Better More" program. Through extensive investments in roads, railways, bridges, and subways, the government reduces logistical costs, enhances connectivity, and fosters greater integration between urban and rural economies.

Foreign investment has also soared, particularly in renewable energy and technology sectors, attracting about $9 billion in 2024. The shift towards sustainability and digitalization aligns perfectly with global trends, positioning the Philippines as an attractive destination for future-focused investments.

Tourism’s resurgence, bringing in approximately 6 million visitors and generating $9 billion in revenue, further diversifies the economy. Enhanced travel infrastructure and a strategic push toward sustainable tourism contribute not only to economic diversification but also strengthen the country’s international appeal and cultural diplomacy.

Effective monetary policy has played a significant role as well. The Central Bank of the Philippines adeptly managed inflation, reducing it from 3.6% in 2023 to 2.4% in 2025, while simultaneously lowering interest rates. These measures have significantly boosted consumer confidence and encouraged borrowing, facilitating further domestic spending, housing purchases, and business expansion.

The relative stability of the Philippine peso also stands out as a key strength, creating an attractive investment climate by ensuring stable import costs and consumer prices. Coupled with low reliance on exports and steady remittance flows, this monetary stability enhances investor confidence and overall economic predictability.

Additionally, the Philippines' demographic dividend—a young, English-speaking, and increasingly skilled workforce—provides a competitive edge. Government reforms in education, particularly in STEM areas, have amplified the skills base, making the Philippines a desirable location for global corporations in tech-driven sectors like fintech and artificial intelligence.

However, the Philippine economy still faces considerable challenges. Persistent poverty affects approximately 18% of the population, and significant infrastructure gaps remain, especially outside metropolitan regions. Addressing these issues through inclusive and equitable growth strategies remains crucial for long-term stability.

Geopolitically, the country’s strategic location and diplomatic neutrality further bolster its economic prospects. Solid ties with key regional players, including the US, Japan, and ASEAN nations, provide a supportive external environment that reinforces resilience against global economic fluctuations.

Looking ahead, the Philippines seems poised not just to sustain but potentially exceed current growth rates. Strategic investments in human capital, innovation, infrastructure, and sustainability provide a solid foundation for continued economic momentum.

In conclusion, the Philippines' remarkable 2025 economic performance serves as an inspiring case study in resilience and strategic foresight. By leveraging internal strengths and effectively engaging global opportunities, the country demonstrates how emerging economies can thrive even amidst global uncertainty.

References

Asian Development Bank. (2025, April 9). ADB Forecasts Philippines' Economy to Grow 6% in 2025. Xinhua. Retrieved from https://english.news.cn/20250409/20a8294ed0f04e9cbb8de7b60e28dfa4/c.html

Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. (2025, February 15). Personal Remittances Reach a Record High of US$3.7 Billion in December 2024. Retrieved from https://www.bsp.gov.ph/SitePages/MediaAndResearch/MediaDisp.aspx?ItemId=7426

Build Better More. (n.d.). Build Better More. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Build_Better_More

Department of Tourism. (2025, January 6). PHL Hits Record High Tourism Revenue in 2024. Retrieved from https://beta.tourism.gov.ph/news_and_updates/phl-hits-record-high-tourism-revenue-in-2024/

FocusEconomics. (2025). Philippines - Interest Rate. Retrieved from https://www.focus-economics.com/country-indicator/philippines/interest-rate/

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2025, March 15). Poverty Incidence Declined from 2021 to 2023 in Ten Basic Sectors. Retrieved from https://psa.gov.ph/statistics/poverty

Reuters. (2025, June 5). Philippine Inflation Eases Further in May, Central Bank Signals Easing. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/philippine-annual-inflation-13-may-2025-06-05/

State Department. (2024). 2024 Investment Climate Statements: Philippines. Retrieved from https://www.state.gov/reports/2024-investment-climate-statements/philippines/

World Economics. (2025). Philippines Real GDP 2024 Estimate and 2025 Projection. Retrieved from https://www.worldeconomics.com/GrossDomesticProduct/Real-GDP/Philippines.aspx

"UP Naming Mahal”: A Ritual of Pride, Nostalgia, and the Paradox of Prestige

The song “UP Naming Mahal” echoes across the University of the Philippines (UP) with deep emotion and patriotic pride. It is sung in ceremonies, protests, and even in solemn farewells — a powerful invocation of loyalty to the nation’s premier state university. For generations of Iskolar ng Bayan, this line is not merely a song lyric; it is a vow of service to the Filipino people and a declaration of belief in the power of a publicly funded education.

Yet, despite this reverence, there exists a quiet contradiction that undermines the sentiment: many of the same individuals and institutions who passionately celebrate UP also place greater value on academic degrees from American, European, and other foreign universities. This paradox is neither trivial nor rare. It reveals deeper fissures in our national psyche and exposes the unfinished project of postcolonial consciousness in the Philippines.

At the heart of this contradiction is the enduring influence of colonial mentality. Despite UP’s history of nationalist activism and critical scholarship, Filipino society still often equates prestige with foreignness. A Harvard or Oxford degree often commands automatic respect, more than a doctorate earned at UP or any local institution. This is not to disparage the excellence of foreign-trained scholars but to question the reflexive assumption that foreign means better.

This assumption often operates subconsciously. Consider how Filipino media, corporate boards, and even government agencies introduce experts: those with foreign degrees are often emphasized, while equally accomplished local scholars are overlooked. 

Within UP itself, many faculty members understandably seek further training abroad, not only to access better research resources but also because such credentials boost their standing at home. The result is a subtle yet powerful feedback loop: even those most committed to UP’s ideals must seek validation from outside to gain influence within.

But the choice is not simply a matter of personal ambition or insecurity. The global academic structure reinforces these dynamics. Many leading journals, funding agencies, and academic networks are centered in the Global North. English-language publications dominate the discourse. Filipino scholars often must first pass through foreign institutions to shape national policy or be heard in global conversations. Thus, what appears as admiration for the West is sometimes a necessary adaptation to a skewed system.

Still, we must not ignore the elitist undercurrents of this reality. A foreign degree carries social capital. It grants entry into exclusive networks and is often used as a status symbol. In the Philippines, where access to foreign education is largely limited to those with resources or connections, this translates into a reinforcement of class hierarchies. The child of a public school teacher who finishes magna cum laude at UP may still be considered less "impressive" than a mediocre student who obtains a foreign master's degree. This disparity is a betrayal of the very values "UP Naming Mahal" represents.

It is here that the contradiction becomes painful. UP was founded to be a university for Filipinos, by Filipinos. It has been home to great thinkers, reformers, artists, scientists, and leaders who transformed the country. Its strength lies in its contextual relevance, its deep understanding of local realities, and its commitment to public service. Yet even as we celebrate these achievements, we continue to look elsewhere for affirmation.

This contradiction is not hypocrisy; it is a symptom of a society still negotiating its postcolonial identity. We remain caught between our desire to define our own standards and our compulsion to conform to global (read: Western) benchmarks. We admire UP as a national treasure, but we doubt its ability to stand on its own against the Harvards and Oxfords of the world — even when UP graduates prove time and again that they can.

What is needed is not blind nationalism, but critical affirmation. We must continue to improve our universities, encourage international exchange, and uphold high standards. But we must also learn to recognize excellence that grows from our own soil. A foreign degree should not be a shortcut to legitimacy, nor should a UP degree be seen as a consolation prize. Both can coexist, but the pedestal must be earned, not presumed.

Overall, if we truly mean it when we sing “UP Naming Mahal,” then we must also mean it in practice — in hiring decisions, in public discourse, in policymaking, and in the stories we tell about success. Otherwise, the song becomes a ritual of nostalgia, not a declaration of belief in our institutions, our own intellects, and our own nation.

And that, more than anything, would be a disservice to UP’s legacy.

Turning Tides: The 2025 Philippine Midterm Elections and What They Reveal

 Introduction

The 2025 Philippine midterm elections have emerged as a pivotal moment, significantly reshaping the nation's political landscape. Amid economic anxieties, evolving voter sentiments, and shifting alliances, the results have pointed to important changes and enduring challenges in Philippine democracy. The following analysis outlines the most significant developments and their implications for the nation's future.

1.  The Marcos Administration's Waning Influence

The midterm elections drastically reduced President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.'s political standing. His alliance won barely half of the contested Senate seats, indicating declining endorsement power and public frustration with unfulfilled promises and economic concerns. The drop in popularity signals a possible political deadlock, hampering his ability to carry out legislative initiatives.

The outcome of the midterm elections reflects general dissatisfaction with President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr.’s handling of the economy. Voters took issue mainly with high food prices and swelling debt.

Aside from the underperformance of his senatorial candidates, the following signs show President Marcos' waning influence: the rise of opposition candidates, the growing divide between him and Vice President Sara Duterte,  and the latter's impressive performance in the South, with five of her endorsed candidates winning Senate seats. 

2. Sara Duterte's Resurgent but Regionalized Influence

As stated, Vice President Sara Duterte's political movement achieved notable success, securing five Senate seats, most of which came from Mindanao, particularly Davao. However, poorer performances in other areas reflect a significant regional disparity. This result may bolster arguments for federalism or increased regional autonomy.

However, the term "Solid South" has gained popularity, referring to the Cebuano-speaking areas that comprise Sara Duterte's jurisdiction. 

We may remember that in the 2022 Philippine national elections, Sara Duterte secured the vice presidency with a record-breaking 32,208,417 votes, accounting for 61.53% of the total votes cast. This not only marked the highest number of votes ever received by any candidate for a single office in Philippine history but also surpassed the 31,629,783 votes (58.77%) garnered by her running mate, Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr., in the presidential race.

3. Strengthened Opposition and Independent Voices.

The elections revealed strong voter support for opposition and independent candidates, including prominent figures like Bam Aquino and Kiko Pangilinan. This trend underscores growing voter dissatisfaction with traditional politics and the Marcos administration, potentially paving the way for greater political pluralism and accountability.

The recent elections in the Philippines showed strong voter support for opposition and independent candidates due to several factors:

• Dissatisfaction with Traditional Politics: The country's personality-driven elections, where candidates focus on charisma rather than policy platforms, have led to a desire for alternative voices. Voters are seeking leaders who prioritize development goals over personal interests.
• Patronage System and Money Politics: The deeply-rooted patronage system in the Philippines has bolstered money politics, especially during elections. Some candidates engage in vote buying, while others misuse public service delivery for electoral purposes. This has led to a growing protest vote against traditional politicians.
• Desire for Accountability: With many poor Filipinos motivated by material benefits in exchange for votes, there's a growing demand for leaders who prioritize long-term development goals over short-term personal gains. Voters want leaders who are accountable to the people, not just their patrons.
• Shift Away from Traditional Party Loyalties: Philippine political parties are often non-ideological and focused on generating support from all sectors of society. This has led to a rise in independent candidates who are not beholden to traditional party loyalties.
• Protest Vote: The robust performance of opposition and independent candidates serves as a protest vote against the current administration and traditional politicians. Voters are seeking change and new voices in politics.

4. Political Dynasties Continue To Dominate

The recent Philippine midterm elections saw political dynasties maintain their significant dominance, with around 80% of MPs coming from influential families. This raises concerns about democratic inclusion, government transparency, and socioeconomic disparities. The persistence of dynasties can be attributed to their access to government resources, financial superiority, and established networks. These advantages enable them to outspend and outmaneuver smaller parties and independent candidates.

The lack of effective campaign finance regulations has also contributed to the dynasties' continued grip on power. Without strong laws to prevent the misuse of wealth and influence, dynasties can exploit these advantages to secure votes. Additionally, voter vulnerability, particularly among poorer families, makes them susceptible to vote buying, a practice that has become more prevalent in recent elections.

The entrenched power structures of dynasties in local politics further solidify their dominance. With 113 out of 149 city mayors belonging to families with multiple members in elected positions, it's clear that dynasties have a strong hold on local governance. The limited ideological differences between parties also make it easier for dynasties to switch allegiances and maintain power, perpetuating their dominance in Philippine politics.

5. Increased Women's Political Participation

The election results revealed growth in women's political representation, with more women obtaining governor and congressional seats. However, women's participation remains disproportionately low, demonstrating that institutional hurdles to greater female political involvement exist.

Women's participation can be attributed to a few key factors: increased voter turnout among women, the rise of women in political dynasties, and the impact of the Party-List Law. Additionally, the "Pink Movement" and other political movements have also played a role in empowering women and encouraging their participation in politics. 

Women have consistently demonstrated higher voter turnout rates than men in Philippine elections. This suggests a strong desire among women to participate in the democratic process and influence policy decisions. 

While political dynasties can sometimes limit independent women's entry into politics, they can also serve as a stepping stone for women to enter the political arena, according to the UP Center for Integrative and Development Studies. The Party-List Law also provides a mechanism for women to gain representation in the legislature, especially when party politics is based on principles rather than personality. 

The "Pink Movement," which gained momentum around Leni Robredo's 2022 presidential run, has demonstrated that women can be influential figures in political mobilization. These movements also create space for women to participate in discussions and become more politically active. 

The Philippine government, through the Local Government Code and other legislation, has made efforts to promote women's representation in local and national politics. These efforts, combined with international mandates, have helped create a more conducive environment for women's political participation.

6. Progressive Candidates' Use of Social Media to Level Playing Field

Progressive politicians supported by groups like Akbayan had significant success, especially in metropolitan areas and along the Lingayen-Lucena corridor. Their successes indicate increased support for progressive changes, which might influence future policy decisions, especially in areas like as social justice, poverty reduction, and the environment.

Akbayan party list nominee Atty. Chel Diokno told the media that while they anticipated receiving many votes, they did not foresee achieving such a high initial tally.

He expressed genuine surprise, emphasizing that the early results greatly exceeded their expectations. Although they had hoped for significant voter support, the actual numbers were far beyond what they had anticipated.

When asked about factors that contributed to their strong initial showing, Diokno attributed it largely to their campaign strategy. He specifically highlighted the effectiveness of their social media campaign, which, in his view, significantly leveled the playing field.

Chel Diokno attributed their successful initial showing in the election to a strategic combination of grassroots campaigning and extensive media outreach, particularly through social media platforms. He emphasized that groups like Akbayan traditionally face significant disadvantages in mainstream media due to limited resources, which restrict their visibility compared to well-funded opponents.

However, Diokno pointed out that social media offered an effective alternative, providing a more equitable environment where resource limitations could be offset by creativity and engagement. This digital approach allowed them to directly connect with voters, significantly boosting their campaign's reach and effectiveness despite financial constraints.

Ultimately, Diokno asserted that their determined use of social media compensated for traditional media disadvantages and demonstrated the potential of digital platforms to level the electoral playing field, empowering resource-limited groups to achieve unexpected electoral success.

7. Sara Duterte's Impeachment Complexity and Political Alliances

The election results have hindered President Marcos' efforts to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte. With considerable Duterte supporters in the Senate, the requisite two-thirds vote for impeachment conviction is questionable. This issue highlights deeper political differences, which might lead to political instability and changing alliances ahead of the 2028 presidential race.

The 2025 midterm elections in the Philippines have complicated efforts to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte in several ways: 

• Uncertain Senate Vote: The elections changed the composition of the Senate, which will act as the impeachment court. Since a two-thirds vote is required for conviction, the new Senate lineup will significantly impact Duterte's fate. With 12 May 2025 midterm election results showing a shift in the Senate's membership, it's uncertain how the senators will vote.
• Potential Delay in Trial: The change in Senate leadership and membership may affect the impeachment trial, originally scheduled to begin in July 2025. Senate President Francis Escudero mentioned the trial would commence after President Marcos' State of the Nation Address.
• Duterte's Alliance-Building Efforts: Vice President Duterte has been building alliances and endorsing senatorial candidates, which some lawmakers view as an attempt to influence potential senator-judges. This move could potentially sway the outcome of the trial.
• Strong Evidence, But Unpredictable Outcome: Despite strong evidence gathered against Duterte, the outcome remains uncertain due to the changed Senate composition. La Union 1st District Rep. Paolo Ortega V believes the evidence is strong but acknowledges that senator-judges will ultimately decide based on their accountability to the people.
• Impeachment Trial Timing: The trial's timing in the wake of the election results has created uncertainty and potential constitutional grey areas. Some argue the trial should proceed immediately, while others believe it should wait for the new Senate lineup.

Overall, the midterm elections have added complexity to the impeachment proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte, making the outcome harder to predict.

8. High Voter Turnout, Reflecting Increasing Citizen Political Engagement

Political engagement is the participation of people in the selection and sanctioning of government officials, including running for office themselves. Political engagement encompasses citizen activities as voters, as current and future contenders for leadership positions in government, and in organized organizations that push elected politicians and appointed public officials via civil society activity and public demonstrations.

Appreciated in the above context, the recent elections augur well for Philippine democracy. The elections had a record voter participation rate of more than 82%, indicating increased public involvement and knowledge of the election's importance. This growth demonstrates the electorate's active involvement and may lead to continued civic engagement and demand for government accountability.

• Increased public engagement: More individuals are actively interested in the electoral process, signaling a growing awareness of the significance of their vote.
• Awareness of the elections' impact: The high turnout likely reflects a more profound understanding among voters of how the elections will influence the country's future and the policies that will be enacted.
• Active citizenship: The record voter participation rate shows a robust sense of civic responsibility among Filipinos, with many citizens exercising their right to choose their leaders.

Overall, the high voter turnout is a positive indicator of a healthy democracy, suggesting that citizens are invested in the electoral process and are actively shaping the country's future.

9. The Marcos Brand is Losing Its Shine

The Marcos brand, once thought to be a political talisman that enabled the Marcoses to return to power after the ignominy of EDSA, is losing its shine. The magic is fading. Imee Marcos' meager 12th-place finish in the senatorial race serves as a perfect indicator.

We can attribute Imee's poor showing to the following factors:

• Youth Voter Influence: Younger voters turned out in large numbers for the 2025 elections, with Millennials and Generation Z accounting for 60% of the electorate. Many in this group supported "KiBam" slate candidates, including Bam Aquino and Kiko Pangilinan, who won Senate seats. This change indicates an increased preference for alternative political narratives over old dynasty politics.
• Imee's Departure from the Administration Slate: Initially part of the administration-backed Alyansa para sa Bagong Pilipinas, Marcos withdrew from the slate in March 2025 following the arrest of former President Rodrigo Duterte. She expressed discomfort with the alliance's direction and opted to run as an independent candidate.
• Imee Marcos’s alliance with the Duterte faction may have weakened her appeal among some voters. After leaving the administration coalition, she gained endorsements from Sara Duterte and Robin Padilla. However, this alignment may have backfired in areas critical of Duterte’s policies—such as Quezon City, Makati, Baguio, Iloilo, Bicol, and Negros—where issues like extrajudicial killings and authoritarianism have made the Duterte brand divisive, particularly among academics, religious groups, and progressives. These liabilities may offset gains in Duterte's strongholds like Davao and parts of Mindanao.

As the Philippines moves toward the critical 2028 presidential elections, these dynamics will undoubtedly shape not just political outcomes but the broader trajectory of the country’s political development.

Going forward, the country's political well-being will rely significantly on tackling economic concerns, improving transparency, promoting inclusive representation, and sustaining strong civic engagement. 

The 2025 midterm elections are a landmark in Philippine politics, revealing significant changes in voter preferences, alliances, and political involvement. These elections have exposed both long-standing structural issues and new prospects for transformation. 

References

Commission on Elections. (2022). "National and local elections 2022 results". https://comelec.gov.ph

GMA News Online. (2025, May 13). "Midterm Elections 2025: Duterte Allies Secure Senate Seats Amid Shifting Political Tides." https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/

Philippine Statistics Authority. (2024). "Philippine Population and Demographics." https://psa.gov.ph

Rappler. (2025, May 12). "2025 Midterm Elections: Summary of Results and Political Shifts". https://www.rappler.com

Senate of the Philippines. (2025, May 17). "Composition and reorganization of Senate after 2025 midterms". https://senate.gov.ph

University of the Philippines Center for Integrative and Development Studies. (2023). "Political Dynasties and Gender Representation in the Philippines". https://cids.up.edu.ph

World Bank. (2024). "Philippines economic update: Overcoming Economic Headwinds." https://worldbank.org

The High Price of Electing Incompetent Senators in the Philippines

Each election cycle, Filipinos have the crucial responsibility of choosing their leaders, especially those entrusted with the hallowed task of crafting laws and shaping national policy—the senators. 

As May 12, 2025, nears, the country once again teeters on the edge of a costly mistake—where name recall and celebrity may once more outweigh competence, qualifications, and sound judgment.

For this is the sad fact: when we elect senators who are more famous than capable, as we have done so since heaven knows when, the real cost to our nation goes far beyond simple disappointment; it translates into lost opportunities, squandered resources, and stalled progress.

Opportunity cost, simply put, refers to the potential benefits or positive outcomes we lose when choosing one alternative over another. In electing senators based primarily on their fame, charm, or wealth rather than legislative competence, we sacrifice the possibility of effective governance and thoughtful policy-making. 

Instead of rigorous discussions and innovative solutions, we are left with shallow debates and superficial rhetoric that fail to address pressing national issues.

Take, for instance, the missed opportunities in healthcare reform, poverty alleviation, education, and environmental protection. Many talented and qualified Filipinos, genuinely passionate about public service, are forced to watch from the sidelines because they lack celebrity appeal, extensive financial resources, or widespread popularity. 

These capable individuals could offer fresh, effective ideas, yet their potential contributions remain unrealized, causing the nation to miss out on critical legislative innovations.

Financially, electing incompetent senators carries substantial costs. Legislative inefficiencies, delays, and misguided projects drain precious public resources. Poorly conceived laws and ineffective governance strategies stall economic growth, resulting in higher burdens on taxpayers. 

This wastage is a direct result of electing individuals ill-equipped to navigate complex policy challenges, leading instead to costly mistakes and mismanagement.

As we approach the upcoming May 12 elections, the troubling pattern of celebrity-driven politics seems poised to repeat itself ad nauseam. Candidates lacking substantial legislative skills yet bolstered by their entertainment credentials, financial might, or social media influence threaten to continue the cycle of incompetence. 

This scenario is not just frustrating—it actively undermines national progress and discourages skilled, dedicated individuals from pursuing public office.

Addressing this crisis requires immediate, collective action. We must cultivate a political culture that prioritizes merit, integrity, and genuine public service over superficial appeal. Robust voter education programs, transparent electoral processes, and stringent campaign finance reforms can help level the playing field. 

By choosing candidates based on competence and commitment rather than popularity or wealth, we ensure that the Senate becomes a place for meaningful discussions, groundbreaking legislation, and genuine national development.

Ultimately, the price of electing incompetent senators is far too high. The responsibility rests on us—the voters—to make informed choices. Let us commit to electing leaders who can truly serve the nation’s best interests, ensuring a brighter and more progressive future for the Philippines.

Filipino and English Can Coexist: Why We Should Strengthen Both

In the ongoing balancing act between Filipino and English, national language advocates often argue that the widespread use of English undermines Filipino identity. However, this debate misses the real problem: the Philippine government’s indecision and lack of strategic vision have stalled both languages.

Filipinos have invested decades in English, not just in school, but in the workplace, diplomacy, overseas employment, and global culture. For millions, English is no longer a “foreign” language but a professional and reasoning tool as natural and spontaneous as Tagalog. Our BPO industry, OFW competitiveness, academic research, and startup ecosystem all run in English. Ignoring this reality in favor of idealistic hopes about language and nationalism is not only inefficient—it’s irresponsible.

Meanwhile, Filipino, largely based on Tagalog, remains stagnant. The government talks about it extensively as the “national language,” but does little to develop it into a language of science, law, or innovation. It thrives in conversation, media, and cultural expression—precisely where it is most at home—but stagnates in formal and academic use. Worse, the consequence of policy confusion is a generation that is less fluent in both English and Filipino.

Some argue that promoting English threatens national identity, but countries like India and Singapore prove the opposite. Both have embraced English as the language of education, business, and science without losing touch with their culture essence. 

India, despite its colonial past, has used English to empower its citizens, enhance its literature, and unify a linguistically diverse population. 

Singapore, on the other hand, through deliberate bilingual education, has turned English into a bridge between communities while preserving native languages like Malay, Tamil, and Mandarin. In both nations, English fluency and cultural pride coexist—and even strengthen one another.

It’s time we stop treating this conundrum between English and Pinoy identity as a zero-sum game. We can affirm Filipino identity while mastering English. We must. Global competitiveness now relies on precise, articulate, and confident English, especially in science, technology, international relations, and economics. Countries like India and Singapore have demonstrated that cultural pride and English fluency can coexist, even reinforce one another.

The Philippines should take the cue.

1. Reaffirm English as the primary language of instruction in science, mathematics, law, and commerce. These fields demand clarity, precision, and access to the latest global knowledge, most of which is published in English. By using English as the main language in teaching in these areas, we ensure that Filipino students and professionals are prepared to compete internationally and engage with the best available resources and research.

2. Invest in training teachers in English proficiency, particularly in public schools. Teacher fluency directly impacts student fluency. Strengthening English skills among teachers, especially in public schools where resources are often limited, ensures fair access to good education and helps bridge the language gap between elite and marginalized communities.

3. Let Filipino flourish organically in its natural domains—arts, media, and culture—without artificially forcing it into technical areas where it is not yet equipped. Filipino excels in emotional, cultural, and everyday expression, and it should be nurtured in these fields where it naturally thrives. Forcing it prematurely into specialized academic or technical domains without careful planning and development risks creating confusion rather than progress and undermines both languages in the process.

Language is a tool—but it is also a weapon. In a fast-changing and competitive world, the nations that thrive are those that use language powerfully not just to preserve identity but to shape global discourse, lead innovation, and unlock economic power. 

Holding on to old divisions between English and Filipino and between globalism and nationalism does nothing but hold us back. The truth is, being fluent in English doesn’t make us any less Filipino—it expands, adapts, and asserts our national character more powerfully on the world stage. We don’t need to fear English; we need to own it—with confidence, competence, and purpose.

It’s time for the government to stop hedging and start leading. Make English mastery a national priority, not an afterthought. Equip every Filipino—not just to speak to the world, but to lead it.

 

Tariffs and Turning Points: How Trump’s Trade War Opens Doors for the Philippines

Introduction

The economic conflict between China and the United States has persisted since January 2018, when U.S. President Donald Trump initiated tariffs and other trade barriers against China. The goal was to compel China to address what the U.S. identifies as longstanding unfair trade practices and intellectual property theft. The first Trump administration argued that these practices could contribute to the U.S.–China trade deficit and claimed that the Chinese government mandated the transfer of American technology to China.

In response to U.S. trade actions, the administration of Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping accused the Trump administration of engaging in nationalist protectionism and implemented "countermeasures." As the trade war escalated throughout 2019, the two sides reached a tense phase-one agreement in January 2020. By the end of Trump's first term, American media outlets widely portrayed the trade war as a failure for the United States, highlighting the crucial role of trade conflicts in shaping global economic opportunities.

The Biden administration maintained existing tariffs and imposed new levies on Chinese products, including electric vehicles and solar panels. In 2024, the Trump presidential campaign proposed a substantial 60 percent tariff on Chinese imports. On February 1, 2025, the second Trump administration raised tariffs on China by 10 percent, followed by another increase of 10 percent on March 4. 

On March 10, China imposed a 15% tariff on American goods, especially agricultural products. By April 2, 2025, the Trump administration raised the total import tariff on China to 54%, leading to China's promise of retaliation. In 2025, the conflict escalated, resulting in the U.S. imposing a 145% tariff on Chinese goods and China retaliating with a 125% tariff on American products, causing a projected 0.2% loss in global merchandise trade. 

After the 125% tariff on April 12, 2025, China announced it would ignore any further U.S. tariffs, stating the current levels made U.S. imports untenable. The U.S. later excluded Chinese cellphones, computers, and electronics from some tariffs.

Impact of Trump's Tariffs 

President Trump has threatened to impose special tariffs on products imported from countries such as Canada, Mexico, and China. These tariffs would focus on imports related to the drug fentanyl and items crucial to national security, including cars, car parts, steel, and aluminum.

If these tariffs go into effect, the average import tariff rate will rise significantly to about 25.8%. However, after accounting for reduced imports, as higher prices usually lead to fewer purchases, the effective tariff rate will be about 11.3%. This would be the highest rate the U.S. has seen since World War II. These new tariffs could cause imports to drop by nearly $800 billion, or 23%, in 2025.

If recent trends continue, the United States could impose tariffs as high as 145% on Chinese goods, prompting a retaliatory 125% tariff from China. Such a development could shave 0.2% off global merchandise trade.

These tariffs will reduce the U.S. economy by approximately 0.8% before considering other countries' responses. When retaliation from different countries is factored in, the total economic loss increases to about 1.0%.

The tariffs are expected to reduce the average household's after-tax income by about 1.2%, translating to an extra $1,243 tax per household in 2025. Additionally, consumers might face reduced options because of the higher prices.

Countries like China, Canada, and those in the European Union have already retaliated with their own tariffs, impacting approximately $330 billion worth of American exports. These measures will further decrease the U.S. economy by another 0.2%.

In 2025 alone, Trump’s tariffs are projected to raise federal taxes by $166.6 billion, marking the most significant tax increase since 1993 and surpassing those implemented by Presidents George H.W. Bush and Obama.

In 2018 and 2019, tariffs covered about $380 billion of U.S. imports. The current "reciprocal" tariffs cover approximately $1.3 trillion of imports from nearly all U.S. trading partners except Canada and Mexico. Additional tariffs targeting fentanyl, steel, aluminum, and cars affect another $518 billion of imports. In total, approximately $2.3 trillion (71%) of U.S. imports now face higher tariffs.

Overview of the Impact of Trump’s Tariffs on Major US Industries

• Automotive Industry:

Trump’s tariffs on imported steel, aluminum, and automotive parts have increased production costs for U.S. automakers, which may translate into higher vehicle prices for consumers and a potential dip in sales. However, these same tariffs aim to incentivize domestic manufacturing and lessen dependence on foreign suppliers. Over time, this could encourage investment in local supply chains and provide a competitive edge to American-made vehicles, fostering job growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector.

• Steel and Aluminum:

Domestic steel and aluminum producers experienced a notable boost due to reduced competition from foreign imports, leading to higher capacity utilization and job creation in those sectors. Still, downstream industries such as construction, automotive, and appliance manufacturing faced rising material costs, which may offset some of these gains. Overall, the tariffs created short-term advantages for primary producers but challenged industries that rely on affordable inputs.

• Agriculture:

Tariffs led to retaliatory measures from trading partners, especially affecting key exports like soybeans, pork, and dairy products. This caused economic pain for many U.S. farmers. In response, however, the U.S. government provided aid packages to mitigate losses, and the trade disputes encouraged American producers to diversify export markets beyond China, fostering long-term resilience and reducing overdependence on a single trading partner.

• Technology and Electronics:

The imposition of tariffs raised the cost of imported components and finished products, resulting in higher consumer prices and potentially reduced sales. Yet, this disruption has prompted some U.S. tech firms to consider reshoring part of their supply chains or exploring alternative suppliers in non-tariffed regions, such as Southeast Asia. This could lead to more secure and flexible sourcing strategies and even drive domestic innovation in component production.

• Retail and Consumer Goods:

Retailers faced increased costs on imported goods such as clothing, footwear, and appliances, often passing these costs onto consumers. Despite these challenges, the tariffs presented an opportunity for U.S. manufacturers and artisans to fill market gaps with local alternatives. Some retailers began exploring domestic and regional supply networks, potentially revitalizing small-scale manufacturing and offering new avenues for local entrepreneurs.

• Pharmaceutical and Chemical Industries:

Tariffs on imported chemicals and pharmaceutical precursors, including ingredients for drugs like fentanyl, strained the supply chain and threatened higher prices. On the other hand, this encouraged discussions about reducing foreign dependence for critical medical supplies, spurring interest in rebuilding domestic production capabilities, which could enhance national health security over time.

• Trade and Logistics:

The increased cost of imports and reduced trade volumes initially created headwinds for shipping and logistics firms. However, some sectors benefitted from a reshuffling of trade flows, with new shipping routes and inland infrastructure investments adapting to emerging patterns. The tariffs also accelerated strategic decisions in logistics optimization and warehousing closer to end markets, boosting domestic freight activity.

Summary

In summary, Trump’s tariff approach seeks to shift the trade balance toward American industry and national priorities. The strategy disrupted supply chains and stirred debate, yet it also provoked a rethinking of sourcing, domestic production, and long-term competitiveness.

Tariffs brought both pain and potential: challenges to consumer affordability, global competitiveness, and sectoral growth coexisted with new investment opportunities, industrial reshoring, market diversification, and a revived conversation on economic self-reliance. 

The ultimate outcome depends on how businesses and policymakers use these disruptions to promote structural reform, innovation, and long-term strategic positioning in the global economy.

Opportunities for the Philippines

• Potential growth in manufacturing exports (electronics, automotive parts, garments)

The Philippines benefits from one of the lowest U.S. tariff rates among Southeast Asian nations, providing a competitive edge over countries such as Vietnam and Thailand, which face higher tariffs. Approximately 33% of Philippine exports to the U.S., particularly in electronics and semiconductors, are exempt from new tariffs, facilitating growth in these high-value sectors. This tariff advantage enables the Philippines to expand its market share in garment and coconut product exports. Furthermore, the favorable tariff environment may encourage foreign manufacturers to invest in the country, driving job creation and economic growth.

• Increasing agricultural exports (fruits, seafood, processed food)

The Philippines has a competitive advantage in U.S. tariff rates compared to neighboring Southeast Asian countries, with lower rates benefiting its agricultural exports. Key exports such as coconut oil and canned pineapple hold potential for increased market share. The Department of Agriculture is diversifying export markets by targeting areas like the Middle East and the EU to reduce reliance on the U.S. Additionally, lower tariffs may attract foreign investment in manufacturing, which would boost the agricultural sector and create jobs.

• Attracting Investment from Companies Leaving China 

The Philippines enjoys a competitive tariff advantage over its neighboring countries, imposing a 17% tariff on exports to the U.S., which attracts foreign investment. Its strategic location in Southeast Asia facilitates access to major Asia-Pacific markets, enhancing its role as a manufacturing hub. The government has implemented tax reforms and initiatives to promote economic zones and infrastructure development, which appeal to foreign firms, particularly those from China. Additionally, the country is concentrating on critical industries like nickel processing to strengthen its position in the electric vehicle battery supply chain.

• Expansion in Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) and Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO)

While tariffs do not directly affect service exports, the ripple effect of rising costs and shifting supply chains has prompted U.S. firms to seek greater operational efficiency. The Philippines, with its English-speaking workforce and established digital infrastructure, remains a global leader in BPO. Opportunities extend into KPO services such as legal support, finance, healthcare, and IT. This shift bolsters revenue inflows and supports job creation in provincial digital hubs under the government’s "Digital Cities 2025" program.

• Boosting electronics manufacturing services (EMS) and semiconductor assembly

The Philippines is well-positioned to benefit from the diversification of the U.S. electronics supply chain. With American companies seeking alternatives to China, the country’s existing expertise in semiconductor packaging and assembly can be scaled up. Major electronics firms, such as Texas Instruments, Analog Devices, and ON Semiconductor, already operate in Philippine economic zones, indicating their readiness for expansion.

• Tourism-related investment and services

Although not a direct consequence of tariffs, regional economic rebalancing has spurred investor interest in stable, culturally aligned markets. The Philippines can attract foreign investment in tourism infrastructure—especially in niche areas like eco-tourism, wellness, and medical travel—by leveraging its natural assets and competitive service costs. American tourist arrivals and U.S.-linked resort developments could increase amid shifts in regional business priorities.

• Development of green energy and sustainable export industries

As global firms seek ESG-compliant supply chains and reduce environmental risks linked to China, the Philippines can promote its potential in green manufacturing and sustainable exports. Opportunities exist in organic agriculture, renewable energy components, and ethical textiles. The country’s inclusion in the EU’s GSP+ scheme and its historical participation in the U.S. GSP (pending renewal) make its sustainable goods more appealing to Western buyers.

• Niche export growth in creative industries (animation, game development, digital media)

With increased scrutiny of China’s digital content and outsourcing restrictions, Western companies are redirecting creative and digital media work to other markets. The Philippines, with its artistic talent pool and Western cultural alignment, is emerging as a hub for animation, gaming, and digital content production. This sector represents a high-value, low-resource path to export growth with significant potential for upskilling and innovation.

A Proactive Economic Policy Response by the Philippines To Trump's Tariffs 

At the time of this writing, Mr. Trump has announced a 90-day pause on the higher reciprocal tariffs imposed on most of the US’ trading partners, including members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). 

The US previously imposed some of the highest tariffs on ASEAN countries, resulting in significant impacts: Cambodia faces a staggering 49% tariff, followed closely by Laos at 48%, Vietnam at 46%, Myanmar at 44%, Thailand at 36%, Indonesia at 32%, Malaysia at 24%, and Brunei at 24%.

In contrast, the Philippines has been subjected to a much lower tariff of 17%, second only to Singapore’s baseline rate of 10%. This comparatively low rate gives the Philippines a competitive edge, making it an attractive destination for foreign direct investments and for companies looking to relocate their orders to countries with lesser tariffs.

With the 90-day pause now enforced, all countries, including the Philippines, will experience a blanket 10% duty set to last until July. The immediate future holds a precarious balance for the Philippines as it navigates these changes.

In light of these developments, the Philippines must intensify its efforts to enhance competitiveness in attracting investments. Understanding Trump's unpredictable nature is crucial—he may spring another "shocker" at any moment, altering the landscape entirely.

For the Philippines, this is no time for complacency. It must sharpen its competitive edge, act decisively, and anticipate shifting dynamics in the global marketplace.

In a world where competition intensifies daily, the focus must pivot toward improving capacities in critical sectors like agriculture, electronics, minerals, and garment and apparel manufacturing. 

The stakes are high, and the time for action is now. Will the Philippines seize this opportunity to redefine its place in the global market, or will it allow itself to become overshadowed by its competitors? The future hangs in the balance, and the nation must prepare to confront the challenges ahead with unwavering resolve. 

Now or never—it's time for the Philippines to transform its potential into undeniable progress.

References

Amadeo, K. (2020, January 15). U.S.-China trade war and its impact on the global economy. The Balance.

Animation Council of the Philippines, Inc. (ACPI). (n.d.). About Us.

Bown, C. P. (2023). The US-China trade war and phase one agreement. Peterson Institute for International Economics Report.

Congressional Research Service. (2024). U.S. tariff policy: Overview (CRS Report IF11030). Library of Congress.

Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). (2023, April 19). Two new PEZA economic zones proclaimed by Malacañang.

Hufbauer, G. C., & Jung, E. (2025). Estimating the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs. Peterson Institute for International Economics Policy Brief.

Matchboard. (2024, April). Outsourcing to the Philippines – the state of play.

Office of the United States Trade Representative. (2024). Section 301 investigation: China's acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation. Executive Office of the President, Washington, D.C.

Outsource Accelerator. (2025, February). BPO sector drives Philippine economic growth in 2025: Citi.

Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA). (n.d.). Ecozones In-Depth: Eco-Industrial Parks & Green Technologies.

Reuters. (2024, March 19). Philippines sees up to $6 bln of investments in casino sector in next 5 years.

Reuters. (2025, March 11). China imposes retaliatory tariffs on U.S. agricultural products. Reuters Business News.

Semiconductor and Electronics Industries in the Philippines Foundation, Inc. (SEIPI). (2023, October). Philippine Electronics Export Performance – October 2023.

Tankersley, J., & Swanson, A. (2025, April 3). Trump administration raises tariffs on Chinese goods to 145 percent. The New York Times, p. B1.

Trading Economics. (2024). Philippines Exports of electrical, electronic equipment to United States.

United States International Trade Commission. (2024). Economic impact of Section 232 and 301 tariffs on U.S. industries (USITC Publication 5175). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Vitrina AI. (2024). Top Best Animation Studios and Companies in Philippines | 2024.

World Trade Organization. (2025). Global merchandise trade outlook amidst U.S.-China trade conflict. WTO Press Release No. 902.