>Consider using: Philippines or the Republic of the Philippines
>Context: The term is politically incorrect and denotes colonialism. Some people of Filipino heritage might use the term, though."
First of all, they're using "denotes" to mean "connotes", so we shouldn't expect a subtle understanding of English.
But second, what "Philippine Islands" does is center geography instead of nationhood or identity. What it connotes is that political boundaries are historically-contingent. Similarly, the "British isles" will always be there, barring geological catastrophe, regardless of whether the United Kingdom ceases to exist, say because Scotland and Wales secede.
If you want to work hard at it, you could make an argument that geography-centering language is "colonialist", because, precisely by revealing that borders are contingent, it might suggest that some more powerful actor, an Empire, might reshape them arbitrarily. However, it also undermines nationalism, and many people would consider that to be a good thing. For example, it's a key sentiment behind liberal immigration policies.
That's a good example. Ireland is part of the British Isles without being "Britain". And now Britain is part of Europe without being "Europe". (Canada has always been part of America without being "America".)
>Consider using: Philippines or the Republic of the Philippines
>Context: The term is politically incorrect and denotes colonialism. Some people of Filipino heritage might use the term, though."
First of all, they're using "denotes" to mean "connotes", so we shouldn't expect a subtle understanding of English.
But second, what "Philippine Islands" does is center geography instead of nationhood or identity. What it connotes is that political boundaries are historically-contingent. Similarly, the "British isles" will always be there, barring geological catastrophe, regardless of whether the United Kingdom ceases to exist, say because Scotland and Wales secede.
If you want to work hard at it, you could make an argument that geography-centering language is "colonialist", because, precisely by revealing that borders are contingent, it might suggest that some more powerful actor, an Empire, might reshape them arbitrarily. However, it also undermines nationalism, and many people would consider that to be a good thing. For example, it's a key sentiment behind liberal immigration policies.