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.