The following were submitted to Bayan Muna blogsite last June 28, 2007. Every time I visited their site it seemed they were over-focused at human rights abuses and extra judicial killings. I had thought it nice then, to bring out open issues that I think are relevant of the time not to be forgotten. Modified
I thought communists are legalized already. I think anti Communists are scaring nobody but themselves. Maybe government should even invite Professor Jose Maria Sison and company, how they should run this nation and bring progress to the Filipino people. Communism and Socialism are academic matters and non issues today.
On Socialism – People’s Ownership of the Means of Production; to Each according To His Work
Onward this point in time, I don’t think anybody can simply tell industrial owners and farmers that their (means of production) belong to the State or are confiscated. So, I imagine any move at social transition would be smooth, legal and systematic. Government is to control or buy-out industries and in the end to own every means down to the Haciendas and the grassroots. Based on present situation – resources, priorities, etcetera, it will take probably more than one generation of Filipinos just to bring about notable, nationwide socialist transformation.
In Socialism the main contradiction is between the Proletariat and the State. Means of production belong to everybody administered for them by the State. Are Filipinos prepared for the system? For some taste of Socialism let us look into government owned and/or controlled corporations (GOCs and GOCCs) and government institutions, the manner they are administered by the State, the state of the State itself, because they are how things will be, expanded all over nationwide. Presently, too many Filipinos do not like what they saw in there. Social surveys have always shown negative ratings for almost everything of the State… I think the immediate enemy of Filipinos today is graft and corruption. Any economic system, Capitalism or Socialism, will not work with that kind of ideology around.
And from layman workingclass point of view, perhaps it would be better for a while if he works for a private employer, with for example Communist Party of the Philippines [CPP] watching over the employer than if he works directly for CPP with nobody watching over the CPP. This is an idea of private enterprise under proletariat class rule. This is also the principle behind the idea of “privatization” which is either a SLOW-DOWN or, as shown by the experiences of socialist States that existed, a STEP BACKWARD- a reversal from Socialism.
If there is immediacy at socialization, I think it should be of industries that are monopoly in character and which are over-burdening the people. Non-profit and State subsidy are not language of Capitalists. They are democratic in origin in the era of capitalism.
[Privatization works in the premise that the State is governed by highly IMPARTIAL and INCORRUPTIBLE people and that there is effective regulation by the State. By any reckoning, and as proven by the outcome of privatization in the Philippines, services are not better than they ought to be. Besides, privatization in this country is not exactly the same as the privatization in advanced States. U.S.A. for example, is a welfare State while the Philippines is not.]
Anyway, Filipinos will likely be in National Democracy for generations to come, unless leaders think that whips and weapons is a good idea of governing its population. I doubt if the idea of marching entire cities into the countryside for their own good or survival as in Cambodia will ever gain popular ground in the Philippines. In our modern time, I don’t think anybody can stand for long on fascism.
On Communism, a Stage Higher From Socialism – Abolition of Private Property; to Each according To His Need
Onward any point in time, I don’t think anybody can tell Filipinos that they no longer own their homes and their cars or their bicycles. Modern day rulers got overthrown for far less ridiculous things than that. We are past the situation when masses had only their chains to lose. [Remembering Lenin”s arise, you have only your chains to lose.]
Transformation has to be smooth, practicable as acceptable. Like, Proletariat NEEDS to live apart from his or her parents therefore State simply gives each couple a key to an apartment to use for free for the rest of their lives. And same to their children someday, since they cannot buy (own) house while they cannot live in streets. And housing unit has to be safe, spacious and livable not to be rejected by people, unlike the Medium Rise Buildings (MRBs) that public work contractors peddled, supported by some leftists equating the project with socialized housing, pushed by Govt. National Housing Authorities (NHA) in the mid 1990s, and which majority of squatters in Payatas, Q.C. and in the National Government Center (NGC) vehemenently OPPOSED. [Majority supported as-is-where-is position.]
Moreover, if State provides for free to one, it must also provide the same to all or else there will be hell with the State. Double standards and inequity by the State are sure invitation to hell. This seems to be one of the causes of tensions in some States that have initiated communalism.
[MRBs in the NGC area alone could have cost the State many tens of billions of pesos in public work contracts that would have ended in dole-outs if not forcible evictions later. Damn! Why do people say “socialized housing” when they mean cheap but un- affordable FOR SALE homes. And they also say “nationalize” when they ought to say socialized trading, socialized industry, etc.]
Presently, Philippine State cannot even provide enough classrooms for children, more acute than admitted since we have children over-packed at 60-70 pupils per room, times 2 (or 3) shifts a day for teachers in many places, compressing time, subjects and lessons that affect quality of education. We have small children reporting to school at 4:00 early morning while some of them would be attending classes into the evening … Literally we don’t have farm roads, good roads, bridges, all over our agricultural territories, in addition to lack of farm-to-market roads.
They are just few issues, living issues, real time issues, today’s issues for all Filipinos. The Philippines, nose high in local and International debts, is not rich for anybody to think that Socialism or Communism is a piece of cake! /RLTJ
On Globalization, To Hate or Not To Hate
[In the Philippines, words like Globalization and Free trade have bad connotations to them. They are matters that are resisted. I think peoples’ struggle should be redirected at making words become their true meaning instead of outright rejecting them.]
Globalization is a shot here during the time of U.S. President Bill Clinton that needs second look. I think, Globalization is something that has been in progress quite naturally and un-noticed until Mr. Clinton pushed it radically. A world revolution by Mr. Clinton, in fact, that stirred the globe.
Globalization meaning free-flow from high potentials to low potentials: U.S.A. is high in capital potential that it wants to FLOW FREELY to countries of low capital potential. This is naturally resisted by the bourgeoisie of the third world or by the States that they influence. Multinationals are sure to outbid the Filipino landlords or farmers for ownership of land, to cite one of the fears. Most Filipino wage earners however prefer foreign employers who are observed more favorable to better benefits for workers compared to local employers;
The Philippines has high labor potential that should flow freely to advanced countries which are relatively low in labor potential. American proletariat, for example, won’t like this as they are affected by heavy influx of foreign workers, many of whom have already entered illegally. No American legislator will go against the American working class by fully opening their borders to the Asians and to the Latino Americanos, but a move that tends to be welcomed by the American employers.
They are spirits of nationalism and interests of social classes at active play in one frame of a series called social evolution that States are presently dealing.
Globalization will mean towards leveling off or averaging of world potentials: Like opening wide an existing dam between developed high water level and developed low water level, or like opening wide an existing circuit between a developed positive pole and a developed negative pole of a battery, it causes heat and sparks (and flooding) but in the end battery or dam will be discharged. No low potential, no high potential, no voltage, no current, no ampere, no pressure. Resistors or regulators between poles would be unnecessary; obsolete… A freer world without dams is formed. [While Marx’s theory of abolition of the State appears incomprehensible, shrinking or minimizing them surely is not.]
The issue here is, should or should not Filipino working class care for the Filipino bourgeoisie which is in fact the threatened or drowning class by Globalization in the Philippines? This is unlike countries with high capital potential wherein the drowning class by Globalization would be their working class.
Presently, at the forefront of the defense of Filipino Bourgeois class interests, are forces that identify themselves as Proletariat. This is a sacrifice of working class interest because foreign investments means jobs. This is within politics of nationalism , ultra in form – a blind rejection of everything foreign to gain the [political] affection of the masses.
The idea in globalization is to remove trade restrictions and protectionism by nations. I think we should look at the clock first, Philippine time among other things, as everybody should remove any and all restrictions. Globalization for all without gate valves or diodes, meaning TWO WAYS AND FAIR, I think yes. / RLTJ