KARL MARX TUESDAYS 

THE LIFE AND STRUGGLES OF THE GREAT REVOLUTIONARY ANDRES BONIFACIO 

By: Comrade Mark Cua 

Andres Bonifacio is a great Revolutionary who lived and fought. However he was betrayed and his fight never ended. The Nightmare Emilio Aguinaldo started had began and was passed down from one generation to another. 

The Treachery of Emilio Aguinaldo was indeed obvious and how he manipulated the Filipino People by becoming a haciendero himself in Cavite. He is indeed a great source of inspiration for the modern Philippine Communist Revolutionary movement. 

Let history not to repeat himself. Learn from the experiences of Andres Bonifacio and Do not let another "Emilio Aguinaldo" win and get to the Filipino once again. Do not let his sacrifice go to waste. His fight is not yet over. It is for the Generation and the CPP (Communist Party of the Philippines) to fulfill a true free and liberated Filipino Society away from the hands of the abusive hands and oppressive ways of the Philippine democratic Government. 

KARL MARX TUESDAYS

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE ARMED REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

2. The Finance(Hacienda) System

The Spanish colonialists DECIDED to intensify feudal exploitation of the people When the galleon trade was Already on the decline During the Latter Part of the 18th Century. The galleon trade HAD Been the main source of income for the administration center in Manila. With This source of income yielding less and less as a result of international Developments Caused Primarily by the pressures of capitalism, the colonial Authorities turned to large-scale cultivation of commercial crops for export. œEconomie reformsâ â € € ?? Were ADOPTED ostensibly to make the Philippines â € € ?? œself-sufficientâ, That is to say, allow the colonialists To have an alternative source of income.

The Economic Society of Friends of the Country was founded by the Spanish Governor-General in 1871 to Certain Encourage the planting of commercial crops for export. The Royal Company of Spain was subsequently enfranchised to monopolize trade in These agricultural crops. The cultivation of tobacco, indigo, sugar, abaca and other crops was imposed. Spain was trying to adjust to the pressures of capitalism, capitalism Especially British and French capitalism, During the late part of the 18th century and the early part of the l9th century. Before the Formal opening of the ports of Manila to non-Spanish ships, These HAD Already started to call on Manila During the Latter Part of the 18th century.

The large-scale cultivation of commercial crops That started the hacienda system still exists today. This Resulted in the more vicious exploitation of the Filipino people. The colonial government Dictated confiscatory prices for the commercial crops. Also, the People Who planted crops These HAD to get Their staple food, rice or corn, from other areas. THUS, specialization in agriculture and commodity production was Introduced Began to disturb the naturally Obtaining economy in a feudal society.

While the Spanish colonialists, Particularly the friars, intensified Their feudal exploitation of the people, 51 non-Spanish foreign shipping and commercial houses Became established in Manila in the middle part of the l9th century. Twelve of These Were American and non-Spanish European houses Which virtually monopolized the import-export trade. These would subsequently open branches at different points in the archipelago: such as Sual, Cebu, Zamboanga, Legaspi and Tacloban Where Were ports opened to foreign trade.

The financial operations of These foreign establishments Strengthened the production of export crops. The overall value of agricultural exports rose from P500,000 in 1810 to P108 million in 1870. This rose even more Rapidly towards the outbreak of the Philippine Revolution of 1898. The cultivation of abaca and sugar crops was Encouraged and These Became the main exports of the country. In the mid-19th century, the level of sugar production was 3,000 picu1s and four Decades later it piculs Reached 2,000,000. American refineries (controlled by the mammoth American Sugar Refining Company) Were specially interested in sugar So THAT in 1885, They Were Already getting two-Thirds of esta crop or 225,000 short tons. In 1898, the American consul in Manila Could boast That the value of trade under His supervision equaled That of 21 competitors combined.

The acceleration of foreign trade in agricultural crops Resulted in the acceleration of domestic trade. The mercantile bourgeoisie Local Significantly more Emerged in domestic trade. NEVERTHELESS, it found economic STI STI Opportunities Limited to investing profits in the acquisition of lands or in the leasing of friar estates. Part of Its profits Went into more university students supporting WHO Studied locally or abroad. THUS, the mercantile bourgeoisie served as the social base of the native intelligentsia.

When the United States ITS imperialist greed Seized in the Philippines for itself, it was very conscious of the necessity of retaining feudalism itself so as to Provide Such Continuously With raw materials as sugar, hemp, coconut and other agricultural products. In using counterrevolutionary dual tactics to deceive the enlightened leadership of the Philippine Revolution, it was aware of the landlord and mercantile character of the right wing of Such a leadership and Moved to assimilate ITS interests. It ADOPTED the tactics to isolate the left wing Represented by Mabini Which was ideologically closer to the revolutionary peasant masses and Which Advocated the restitution to the people of the lands taken away from them by the Spanish colonial government and the friars.

US imperialism, THEREFORE, did not hesitate to guarantee in the Treaty of Paris of 1898 the property rights of the landlord class under the Spanish colonial regime and even returned to the MOST despotic landlords Spanish ecclesiastical and lay the lands That HAD Been Confiscated from them by the revolutionary masses. The continuance of feudal rights assured the US colonial government of political support by the betrayers of the revolution and of continued supply of raw materials for US industries. The Payne-Aldrich Act of 1909 ADMITTED Philippine products, chiefly agricultural, duty-free into the United States. In 1910, the US imperialists sugar mill set-up to act as a signal for the type of investments They Were MOST interested in making. In 1913, the Underwood Tariff Act removed all quota limitations on Philippine agricultural products exported to the United States. All These steps sirigle Had the effect of tying down the Philippines to a colonial and agrarian economy highly dependent on a few export crops. During the First Three Decades of US imperialist rule, agricultural production for export was Rapidly expanded more than ever before. By 1932, more than 99 per cent of sugar exports was going to the United States.

By conquering the Philippines, US imperialism was reliable to create the conditions Which it was less in a position to create through sheer commercial operations by STI financing export-import and shipping firms under the Spanish colonial rule. It semifeudalism enhanced further in the countryside by encouraging capitalist farming, corporate ownership of land and merchant usury. It put up sugar mills, abaca and coconut mills mills under corporate ownership and around Which the landlords Were organized. Aside from Which Were These Measures Directly effected in the countryside, US imperialism dumped finished products in order to tie down the economy to the production of a few export crops and to the commodity market.

The pattern of the economy and of agricultural production Encouraged by US imperialism ITS During colonial rule have direct Remained Basically unchanged. As of 1957, large-scale cultivation of export crops prevailed over About 20 per cent (1.5 million hectares) of the total agricultural land. Land devoted to food crops Comprised About 80 percent (5.5 million hectares). As of 1970, DESPITE conspicuous in the sixties Attempts to expand it, large-scale cultivation of export crops prevailed over About 28 per cent (2.5 million hectares) of the total agricultural land. Land devoted to food crops Comprised About 72 per cent (6.4 million hectares). Capitalist methods of exploitation are strikingly evident in lands Where export crops are cultivated, except in some few areas mechanization Where Has Been Introduced by the landlords.

Not all bankrupt owner-tenant-Peasants Peasants and displaced from lands converted into capitalist farms can be accomodated as industry workers in the areas or as a regular farm workers. The enterprises set-up by the US monopolies and national capitalists are Insufficient to absorb them. Because of extremely limited Opportunities in industry and agriculture, there is excessive competition for few jobs Which industrial press down wage conditions as well as overcrowding on land.

KARL MARX TUESDAYS

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE ARMED REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

II. Feudalism

1. The Meaning of Feudalism

On reaching the stage of imperialism, capitalism as a world historical phenomenon has Become moribund, parasitic and decadent. US imperialism exports to STI STI Capital surplus semicolonies colonies and not to raise the economy of These to the level of capitalist development but Merely to extract superprofits by exploiting the local cheap labor and cheap raw materials drawing out. Only very limited extent to some US enterprises will be set-up to process on the spot Certain raw materials available locally. The extent and quality of US monopoly equity injected into the Philippine economy since the beginning of the 20th century Merely Have Caused the subordination of domestic feudalism to US imperialism. It is in the nature of US imperialism to cause uneven and spasmodic development, to Maintain a few cities ruled by the purchaser class and preserve a vast countryside ruled by the landlord class.

Feudalism still Persists in the Philippines, Although US imperialism has Introduced a certain degree of capitalist development. US monopoly capital city has Assimilated the seed of capitalism That Is Within the womb of domestic feudalism but at the same time it has prevented us the full growth of esta seed into a national capitalism. The persistence of feudalism and the growth of a limited degree of capitalism can only be Understood by delving into history. Feudalism is a mode of production in Which the main forces of production are the Peasants and Which They till the land and the relations of production are Basically Characterized by landlord oppression and exploitation of the peasantry. The most immediate manifestation of feudalism is the possession of vast areas of arable land by a few landlords WHO Themselves do not till the land and WHO compel a big number of tenants to do the tilling. Relations Between the parasitic feudal landlord class and the peasantry productive Essentially Involve the extortion of exorbitant land rent in cash or kind from the Latter by the former. Such basic tenant-relations Peasants leave the impoverished as their share of the crop is just enough or even Often Inadequate for Their subsistence. They are further subjected to feudal Such practices as usury, compulsory menial service and various forms of tribute. The old landlord class Essentially Which Utilizes rent land for private pleasure and luxury STI is Satisfied with the backward method of agriculture Because it gets more than enough for STI needs from the sheer exertion of physical work With a simple agricultural implements by a big mass of tenants. On the other hand, the WHO has only tenant His Own Assigned plot to till is further impoverished by the low level of technology.

It was not the first Spanish colonialists WHO laid the foundation of feudalism in the country. The sultanates of Mindanao, Especially Those of Sulu and Maguindanao, Preceded by the Spanish conquerors At least a century in doing so. These Were the first to create a feudal mode of production producing an agricultural surplus to support a landed nobility of substantial membership, fighters, religious teachers and traders. The growth of feudalism under the Islarnic faith was stimulated by the brisk trade That was centered in Sulu. Later on, the feudal society Became determined to further consolidated by ITS resistance to Spanish colonialism. Representing a higher form of social organization than That Which Obtained in other parts of the archipelago, the sultanates of Mindanao Could more Effectively resist the Spanish colonialists Represent Who Did not any higher form of social organization and Who Were Easily Identified as an external enemy due to the long-standing conflict of Islam and Christianity then.

It was Spanish colonialism, however, Which Compelled the institution of feudalism on the widest scale in the archipelago. Under ITS administration, it developed the feudal mode of production to the fullest extent. In Their rule of more than three centuries, colonial Authorities Took the two major steps to entrench feudalism in the Philippines. These Were 1) the assignment of parcels as a royal grant, a reward for service or loyalty to the Spanish crown and 2) the compulsory cultivation of crops for export Certain starting During the Latter Part of the 18th century.

The parcel was a royal grant to religious orders, charitable Institutions and Individuals. It encompassed a large area and several barangays Brought together into one economic and administrative unit. The chiefs of barangays Were converted to Become the chief running dogs in every locality in Their capacity as tribute collectors, enforcers of corvee labor and main Devotees of the alien faith. The essential purpose of the assignment, indeed was to Facilitate the collection of tribute in cash or agricultural commodity, the enforcement of corvee labor and the indoctrination of the people in Such a feudal ideology as Roman Catholicism. The colonialists used Christianity to foster docility and servility.

A surplus in agricultural production was created but only to support and feed the Spanish Administrators, clergy, soldiery and the Indigenous nobility. The tribute was Collected as a Means of supporting the foreign rulers, Especially for providing them with food and luxuries. Corvee labor was employed to expand the agricultural fields, build government and church buildings and Improve Communications Between the villages and the town settlement Where the set-up curate His quarters.

Within the parcel, Spanish laws on private property in land Began to be applied arbitrarily By Both the clergy and lay trustees. Communalism was abolished in fully colonized areas. The Spanish encomenderos Claimed vast tracts of land as Their private property. Also the Indigenous nobility was allowed to lay claims on private agricultural lands and at the same time it was cajoled into making direct donations of land to the Catholic Church. In cases Where the people resisted, the colonialists cruelly Grabbed the lands from them by force of arms. All Conquered lands Were Considered property of the royal crown, subject to arbitrary colonial disposal by the Authorities. Systematically corvee labor was used to clear new lands or in cases Where the people on Their Own volition would create new agricultural fields for Their own needs, They would only be subsequently These Told That did not belong to them but to the royal crown or to some encomendero Who Had Gained title over these.

When the friars later Advocated the abolition of the encomienda system, it was not really With the view of having feudal abuses eliminated. Their intention was mainly to demand the application of Spanish laws Rigorous Within a more orderly administrative system So THAT clerical and lay landlords would not collide Too Often With Each Other In Their common landgrabbing activities. Friar entrusted criticism of the system Merely led to the creation of provinces under the Central administration of Manila. The system entrusts HAD Already taken deep roots. The religious orders HAD Already accumulated vast lands.

Either Spanish lay trustees chose to stay in the archipelago to breed successive generations of island and mestizos or to sell out to other merchants and landlords, bring gold back to Spain and Retain Their status as peninsular. The native landlords HAD Their Own Within the landowning class stratum. Some of them Became only landlords at the expense of fellow Indians Who Were Their dispossessed through sheer landgrabbing Who Fell into bankruptcy or through the due Processes of feudalism. 

KARL MARX TUESDAYS

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

II. US Imperialism

The Scheme to Prolong U.S. Domination

In the last 10 years, the crisis in the Philippine economy has rapidly worsened. This has been the result of the vicious maneuvers of U.S. imperialism to shift the burden of its economic crisis at home to its colonies and semicolonies and also to prepare for the termination of the Laurel-Langley Agreement and the Parity Amendment. The scheme of U.S. imperialism is to put the Philippines into such a desperate financial situation as to ensure the prolongation of imperialist privileges. At the same time, all-out military and police preparations and actual operations are conducted to counteract the revolutionary mass movement inflamed by the economic crisis. Counterrevolutionary reformist campaigns are also waged to sow confusion in the ranks of the revolutionary masses.

As a result of the full and immediate decontrol of foreign exchange at the start of the Macapagal puppet regime, U.S. business firms remitted profits heavily and the comprador-landlords used their dollar earnings as they pleased. The dollar reserves of the reactionary government were depleted and the peso sank in value from P2.00 to P3.90 per U.S. dollar in the absence of sufficient dollars to support it. To maintain the peso at its new level, the Philippine reactionary government was extended “stabilization�? loans at onerous terms. But these loans were mainly sucked up by U.S. firms and their comprador-landlord and bureaucrat allies. The puppet chieftain Macapagal promoted the “open-door�? policy on foreign investments and the idea of “joint ventures�? and allowed U.S. subsidiaries to grab the foreign loans in remitting profits, building up their local assets, taking over Filipino enterprises or overloading them with foreign loans in preparation for being taken over and the like.

During the first four years of the Marcos puppet regime, U.S. imperialism went high on aggravating the puppet policies of the Macapagal regime. The Marcos puppet regime was even more efficient in implementing the recommendations made by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank as early as 1960. It was able to increase taxes ostensibly of those with the ability to pay, who in turn shifted the tax burden to the broad masses of the people in the form of steeply rising prices. The Marcos puppet regime profligately made expenditures on public works and other inflationary projects. The U.S. subsidiaries and the comprador-landlords were extended the biggest government loans and guarantees. There was a splurge on luxuries, buildup of sugar mills, mining projects and mining speculation. The bureaucrat capitalists exacted the most stupendous amounts of kickbacks on import-export contracts, especially in contracts with foreign machinery and construction firms.

At the beginning of 1970, it was clear that the Marcos puppet regime had succeeded in making the Philippines more bankrupt than ever before, with a big internal and external debt. The peso sank to another low level, at more than P6.00 per U.S. dollar. In only eight years, the peso suffered a devaluation of more than 200 per cent in relation to the U.S. dollar. The International Monetary Fund, functioning as the agency of U.S. imperialism, dictated the devaluation of the peso as a precondition for the rescheduling of loan payments and also for the granting of new loans by U.S. imperialism. The automatic result of the peso devaluation was the increase in the price of all commodities and the increase in value of all foreign debts.

In February 1970, the peso value of the $1.5 billion foreign debt rose from P5.85 billion to at least P9.3 billion (at the unsettled rate of P6.20 per U.S. dollar) excluding interest which also rose. In June, only five months after, the foreign debts reached $1.9 billion or at least P11.78 billion excluding interest. Annual interest payments alone on these debts consumed half of the dollar earnings on Philippine raw material exports. In this process, U.S. imperialism is the worst usurer in the whole world. The Philippines does not stop begging for foreign loans from U.S. imperialism because it has to import many vital commodities which its colonial economy does not produce and because it has to service previous foreign debts. The rapid increase in the value of such foreign loans can only concretely mean ever cheaper raw materials and cheaper local labor for U.S. imperialism and an ever higher cost of importing finished products from the United States and other imperialist countries. The working people are today suffering from the higher prices of commodities; their real income has gone down and no adequate adjustment has been made by the puppet government. The daily minimum wage has been refixed at P8.00 for industrial workers, a mere increase of 33 per cent, yet the devaluation is at least 60 per cent and continues to cut down real wages in a rapid way.

A puppet government that is bankrupt cannot be expected to undertake the expropriation of U.S. assets with U.S. dollars. It is both politically and economically impossible for that puppet government to do 90. The repeated devaluation of the peso has increased the vslue of these alien assets and has favored their buildup in 90 many related ways. As a matter of fact, the U.S. monopolies have deliberately increased their assets in the Philippines from $440 million in 196220 to at least $2.0 billion (book value) in 1969. They did so by bringing in only a small amount of direct investments and by borrowing heavily from local credit sources. They sucked up the very same laws that they had extended to the Philippine puppet government at onerous terms. The rapid buildup of U.S. interests, inside and outside the areas of “parity rights�? is obviously calculated to effect a firmer internal U.S. political and economic control of the Philippines. It is to prepare for the termination of the Laurel-Langley Agreement and the Parity Amendment and to nullify any notion that U.S. assets could be bought out within the framework of reactionary laws.

In the light of the financial bankruptcy of the reactionary government and the severe impoverishment of the Filipino people, it is clearly counterrevolutionary to advocate the “peaceful nationalization�? of the economy or to hope that the mere formal termination of the Laurel-Langley Agreement and the Parity Amendment would automatically inaugurate economic independence. Besides, the majority of U.S. investments (more than 50 per cent\ are now outside the areas of “parity rights�? and are therefore legally allowed to stick in business entities where U.S..investors can own and control more than 40 per cent.

In order to promote the acceptance of U.S. investments in the Philippines, U.S. imperialism is actually subsidizing counterrevolutionary organizations and movements spouting such nonsense as “peaceful revolution,�? “constitutional reform,�? “due process,�? “just compensation,�? “profit-sharing,�? “joint ventures,�? “hospitality to foreign guests�? and other such hogwash. These counterrevolutionary slogans are all intended to slur over the viciousness of U.S. monopoly capital and to head off the revolutionary mass movement clamoring for people’s war against U.S. imperialism and all its local lackeys.

Not even the national bourgeoisie can hope to increase its share in the exploitation of the Filipino people. This social stratum is daily facing bankruptcy. The few commodities that it produces locally cannot escape the rising cost of importing fuel, equipment, spare parts, raw materials and the like. The local sources of credit have practically dried up for the national bourgeoisie. More than this local stratum, the Japanese militarists and the Soviet social-imperialists have the better chance of joining up or competing with U.S. imperialism in the exploitation of the people.

The Investment Incentives Law was enacted to pave the way for the continuance and aggravation of U.S. economic control over the Philippines after the termination of the Laurel-Langley Agreement and the Parity Amendment. The Constitutional Convention now being played up by the counterrevolutionaries as a channel for “change�? in Philippine society is actually a step towards allowing the U.S. monopolies to own more than 40 per cent equity beyond 1974, even in the utilization of public lands, exploitation of natural resources and the operation of public utilities. As certain as dominance of comprador and landlord delegates in the Constitutional Convention, the accommodation of the Investment Incentives Law and an unequal treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation with the United States will be carried out by the most significant amendments in the colonial constitution.

The Investment Incentives Law empowers the Board of Investments, a mere agency of the puppet president, to allow U.S.-dominated enterprises to persist or be set up in the Philippines even without limiting their equity capital to a maximum of 40 per cent in corporations as per requirements of the present constitution. Section 19, Paragraph 3 of the investments law allows foreign investors to own even 100 per cent equity in local corporations provided that they merely signify their intention of selling shares of stock to Filipinos or “Philippine nationals�? within 10 years from the date of registration of such corporations. On the eleventh year, these corporations are supposed to actually offer for sale shares of stock in the stock exchange. But if Filipinos and “Philippine nationals�? fail to buy enough shares to reduce direct foreign equity to 40 per cent, so much the better for the foreign investors because they would be permitted to continue owning equity beyond 40 per cent for 20 years from the date of registration of the corporations. After one period of 20 years, these corporations may again be permitted to stay under unlimited U.S. ownership and control for another period of 20 years.

The Investment Incentives Law sanctifies the “Philippine national,�? a corporation with a maximum of 40 per cent foreign equity in its capital structure. Thus, there is so much talk nowadays about giving “national treatment to U.S. investments among the puppet politicians. The outlandish definition of “Philippine national “ is calculated to allow the U.S. monopolies to hold more than 40 per cent equity even in local corporations where they are restricted to a maximum limit of 40 per cent equity. For an illustration, let us have corporations A and B. If corporation A bears 40 per cent foreign equity and qualifies as a “Philippine national,�? it can acquire and hold 60 per cent equity in corporation B side by side with 40 per cent equity directly headed by foreign investors. In such an interlocking relationship, corporation A actually effects 64 per cent foreign equity in corporation B, if one were to do away with legal blinders. In turn, corporation B will certainly have an impact on corporation A in favor of foreign control.

It is already sufficient for the U.S.monopolies to own and control 40 per cent equity in order to control an entire corporation irternally. This is easily effected by keeping solid 40 per cent equity in the hands of foreign investors and keeping diffused through the stock market the 60 per cent among Filipino petty shareholders. It is an old trick of monopoly capitalists to use a small but solid block of shares to control a big mass of small shareholders. It is in line with this imperialist trick that there is a huge campaign for “profit-sharing�? (an obscurantist term for stock manipulation) to mislead some wage-earners and petty-bourgeois elements to surrender their meager savings and future earnings to the exploiters or allow the U.S. monopolies and the local reactionaries to rob the Social Security System (S.S.S.), the Government Service Insurance System (G.S.I.S.), the Development Bank of the Philippines (D.B.P.) and the Philippine National Bank (P.N.B.). The U.S. imperialists, rapacious as they are, wish to have more levers for retaining their political and economic power over the Philippines.

There are other ways by which the U.S. monopolies could continue controlling and enjoying ownership of more than 40 per cent of the capital in a corporation and also more than 40 per cent of the profits even after the termination of the Laurel-Langley Agreement and the Parity Amendment. These were obsequiously explained by the Philippine panel to the American panel in the negotiations on the Laurel-Langley Agreement. The U.S. monopolies could hold non-voting shares and bonds in corporations, exercise credit control, impose management contracts, manipulate purchase agreements and technical assistance contracts and so many others that reactionary power permits. Moreover, the Braderman-Virata negotiations have sought to perpetuate “parity rights�? by simply replacing the term with a new one, “national treatment,�? in the treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation now being cooked up. In the communique issued by the negotiators, it is evident that the U.S. imperialists and their local running dogs are willing to remove U.S. “parity rights�? only from the field of retail trade.

The Investment Incentives Law worsens the economic enslavement of the Filipino people and sells off every semblance of Philippine sovereignty to U.S. imperialism. The puppet state is bound by this law never to expropriate or requisition foreign assets. It is also bound to provide U.S. dollars to foreign investors for the repatriation of investment, remittance of earnings and payment of all foreign loans and contractual obligations. In addition to these basic privileges, the U.S. investors through their corporations registered with the Board of Investments enjoy such “incentives�? as capital-gains tax exemption, tax allowance, tax exemption on sale of stock dividends, deduction of organizational and pre-operating expenses, accelerated depreciation, net operating 1oss carryover, tax credit, tax exemption on imported capital equipment, employment of foreign nationals, deduction for expansion reinvestment, protection from government competition, preference in grant of government loans, absorption of G.S.I.S. and S.S.S. funds and special export incentives.

The Investment Incentives Law has set a pattern of legislation intended to perpetuate U.S. ownership and control of local firms to the extent of 100 per cent. The Export Incentives Law allows foreign equity up to 55 per cent in export industries and up to 100 per cent in pioneer industries engaged in export.

Following the dictates of their U.S. imperialist masters, the reactionaries have also taken to creating free trade zones, like the Mariveles Free Trade Zone, to let the U.S. monopolies have permanent economic enclaves where they are beyond the tax laws of the Philippine puppet government.

U.S. imperialism is using both peaceful and violent methods of suppressing the Filipino people’s clamor for national liberation and democracy. The C.I.A. and other subversive agencies of U.S. imperialism are subsidizing and manipulating various branches of the puppet government, “civic�? and “reform�? organizations, educational and cultural institutions and the reactionary mass media to wage a propaganda campaign designed to whip up a “climate for foreign investments�? and an atmosphere of anti-communist hysteria. At the same time, all-out violent efforts are being exerted to “nip in the bud�? the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People’s Army, meaning to say, the broad masses of the people who have risen to shake off their colonial shackles. Increased military supplies and training in counterinsurgency techniques are being extended to local police forces through the A.I.D. Offlce of Public Safety and to the reactionary armed forces through the JUSMAG. So many fascist crimes are being committed in the name of anticommunism against the people. The Marcos fascigt puppet regime daily promotes the rise of fascism in an attempt to cow the people.

Whenever a dastardly crime is committed by U.S. military personnel and there are widespread demands for justice which find their way even into the reactionary press, the puppet government goes through the motion of asking the U.S. Embassy for renegotiations on the U.S.-R.P. Military Bases Agreement. When the din dies down, talk of having renegotiations also ties down. What is made to prevail is the treacherous idea that the foreign military bases provide a dollar income for the puppet government. A measly annual income of about $130 million to $I50 million from the U.S. military bases for the puppet government and vice lords is clearly not enough to pay for the transgression of Philippine sovereignty and territorial integrity and also the actual economic deprivation and sabotage resulting from the occupation of potential agricultural and mineral lands and the wanton smuggling of U.S. goods through the U.S. military bases.

Whenever U.S. imperialism wages a war of aggression against another country, the Philippine puppet government never hesitates to call for or join a war council under the direction of U.S. imperialism. The necessity for U.S. imperialism to hold on to its military bases in the Philippines becomes more clear. These military bases are the ultimate guarantee for the protection of its foreign investments in the Philippines and also for launching wars of aggression in Asia. Despite all talks of U.S. “withdrawal�? from Asia, U.S. imperialism repeatedly insists that it will remain a “Pacific power�?. Sham talk of “withdrawal�? is only intended to give Filipino running dogs an occasion to beg U.S. imperialism to stay. Whenever the demand for U.S. withdrawal is raised by the broad masses of the people, the local diehard reactionaries say that it is untimely to “renegotiate�? treaties when the Philippines is suffering from an economic crisis and is begging for foreign loans.

Being fast isolated as the Number One enemy of the world’s peoples and the Filipino people, U.S. imperialism is desperately trying to dissimulate its role as the principal oppressor and exploiter. As before, it wants to make the Philippine government appear to be begging of its own volition for investments not only from the United States but also from so-called international financial institutions and consortiums 21 and such other imperialist countries as Japan and the Soviet Union, among others. In imposing its imperialist policies on the Philippine puppet govermnent, the United States does not only make use of the A.I.D. and its other direct agencies but also the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, international consortiums, various agencies of the United Nations and “regional�? organizations. But when an internal analysis is made of the accounts, it is U.S. imperialism that inevitably comes out as the principal bloodsucker.

Aggravating the old bilateral and multilateral treaties and agreements shackling the Philippines, U.S. imperialism encourages the Philippine puppet government to promote such new “regional�? arrangements as the Asian Pacific Council (ASPAC), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Southeast Asian Ministers’ Economic Council (SEAMEC) and others. These are ballyhoed as regional organizations independent of U.S. imperialism but are clearly composed of the puppet government bound to U.S. imperialism in so many ways. Efforts of U.S. imperialism to hide behind such farcical organizations are being intensified under the “Nixon Doctrine�? of “making Asians fight Asians.�? But U.S. imperialism can never conceal its aggressive nature; it will always keep and use its military personnel abroad as much as it can.

At any rate, U.S. imperialism is rapidly reviving Japanese militarism to serve as its principal Asian instrument and is accomodating it in the Philippines. It has the pipe dream of retaining Japan as its fugleman in Asia. In line with the wishes of U.S. imperialism, the Marcos puppet regime has been maneuvering to have the unequal Japan-R.P. Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation ratified. Even without this treaty, Japan is being allowed to participate in the plunder of Philippine mineral, marine, forest and agricultural resources. It is being allowed to make investments and dump its goods in the Philippine market. It now ranks second only to the United States in investments and control of Philippine foreign trade.22 The reactionaries wish to give Japan the special privilege of moving as it pleases its fishing fleets as well as its naval vessels in Philippine territorial waters.

U.S. imperialism is also calculatingly compelling the Philippines to open diplomatic and trade relations with Soviet social-imperialism. Under the guise of being able to extend loans, especially in the form of capital goods, Soviet social-imperialism is trying to get a share of raw material products from the Philippines, dispose of its shoddy commodities in the Philippine market and impose usury. Like Japan, Soviet social-imperialism is being maneuvered by U.S. imperialism to overextend itself in the defense of the world capitalist system and share in the responsibility of maintaining reactionary governments that are basically puppets to U.S. imperialism.

U.S. imperialism is specifically interested in allowing Soviet social-imperialism to help the local revisionist renegades sabotage the revolutionary mass movement and help the reactionary government foster the illusion that there is democracy. Eager to benefit from the accomodation being granted by U.S. imperialism, the Lava revisionist renegades, the Philippine agents of Soviet social-imperialism, have on many occasions fed to the reactionary armed forces information against the Communist Party of the Philippines, the New People’s Army and the broad masses of the people. They have conducted slander campaigns and bloody forms of intrigue against the people.

The strategic alliance of U.S. imperialism, Japanese militarism and Soviet social-imperialism into which the Philippine puppet government has been drawn is basically directed against the people, revolution, communism and China. In this arrangement, U.S. imperialism makes use of Japanese militarism to keep in check Soviet social-imperialism and Soviet social-imperialism to keep in check Japanese militarism. While they ally themselves against their common enemies, they cannot but contend among themselves as imperialist powers for the redivision of the world. This is a self-defeating arrangement.

Though U.S. imperialism is relatively strong in the Philippines, it has actually become weak on a world scale. It can no longer postpone its collapse. This is now the era of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought when imperialism is heading for total collapse and socialism is marching toward world victory.

Unlike in the last two world wars when it could take advantage of the disaster of other imperialist powers, U.S. imperialism now finds itself being pushed to its own total disaster by the worldwide anti-imperialist struggle. By overextending itself throughout the world in order to oppress the people, U.S. imperialism is now being struck hard by more and more people and in more and more places than it can cope with. People’s wars are raging all over the world, especially in Asia, Africa and Latin America. At this stage, when so many oppressed peoples have risen up to make revolution the main trend, U.S. imperialism is rapidly heading for total collapse. If it were to launch a world war, it would only hasten its own destruction. If it did not, it still would have no chance of winning its wars of aggression as those against the peoples of Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and other countries. In the homeland of U.S. imperialism, the white and black proletariat are intensifying their revolutionary struggle against the bellicose impositions of the big bourgeoisie. U.S. imperialism makes alliances with other imperialist powers but the latter never fails to take advantage of its plight. Though it appears to be a huge monster, U.S. imperialism is in essence a paper tiger in the throes of its deathbed struggle.

While U.S. imperialism and its allies are heading for disaster, the Chinese and Albanian peoples are conso1idating socialism and ensuring a powerful rear base for the worldwide anti-imperialist struggle. The international united front is ever expanding to isolate counterrevolutionary diehards. All oppressed peoples can look forward to a bright future as they arm themselves with the same basic weapons with which the Chinese and Albanian peoples have achieved their glorious victories. The Philippine Revolution is today illumined by the great universal truth of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tsetung Thought. The Communist Party of the Philippines, the revolutionary party of the Filipino proletariat, has become reestablished on a correct theoretical basis to lead the people to victory .

KARL MARX TUESDAYS

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

II. US Imperialism

U.S. Monopoly Control of the Philippines

In an uneven and spasmodic way, U.S. surplus capital has been invested in the Philippine economy. At present the U.S. monopolies and their local subsidiaries own or control such businesses involving petroleum,14 tire and rubber, drugs, fertilizers, chemicals, mining, heavy equipment, marketing, transport facilities and others. The majority of the biggest corporations in the Philippines today are American. They control at least 50 per cent of the total business assets in the country. The book value of these U.S. private assets is at least $2.0 billion, according to available sources in 1969.15 The market value is several times higher. These assets represent at least 60 per cent of the total U.S. private investments in Southeast Asia. Of the total foreign private investments in the Philippines, U.S. investments constitute 80 per cent. The volume and value of U.S. investments in the Philippines are even greater today than during the period of direct U.S. colonial rule when U.S. private investments reached the level of P537 million or $268.5 million (based on Bureau of Census and Statistics figures).

The magnitude of U.S. investments is not the only thing that weighs down heavily on the Filipino people. It is also their strategic position. For instance. petroleum (supplied by Esso, Caltex, Mobil, Filoil and Getty Oil)16 is overwhelmingly, under the control of the U.S. oil monopolies. By this commodity alone, U.S. monopoly capitalism controls every other commodity transported or processed in the Philippines. The U.S. oil monopolies supply more than 90 per cent of the country’s energy requirements. Tire production, trade in construction materials, import-export and the wholesale trade are also controlled by foreign firms, chiefly American. They control bulk sales to end-consumers like big utility plants. Though U.S. capitalists appear to, have withdrawn from the field of public utilities, they sold a great portion of their shares in the Meralco (electricity) and P.L.D.T. (telephone) only after burdening these firms with U.S. loans and after securing guarantees from government financing institutions. These enterprises remain as sources of huge interest payments and are increasingly subject to being retaken over through bonds floated in Wall Street.

The U.S. imperialists own the largest commercial banks, insurance companies and other financing institutions. They therefore control the Philippine banking system. They grab the domestic savings of the people and utilize these to support U.S. enterprises here. In this regard, an oft-cited case ofYankee cleverness is the original capitalization of the Philippine-American Life Insurance Company at less than a million pesos and its rapid growth into a billion-peso corporation in a matter of two decades after the last war. U.S. firms secure credit not only from local U.S. banks but also from Philippine-owned banks. Another flagrant case of Yankee rapaciousness can be seen in gold production. For a long period of time under the Gold Subsidy Law, the Central Bank bought gold from Benguet Consolidated and other U.S. mining companies at $57 to $67 per ounce, that is to say, $22 to $32 above what was then the world price of $35 per ounce.

During the period of 1960 to the middle of 1969, foreign investors (principally American) borrowed P13.5 billion from local credit sources. For the period of 1962-68, U.S. firms alone were able to borrow P8.0 billion in clear pursuit of old imperialist practice and also in clear application of the U.S. policy of exhausting local credit sources in colonies and semicolonies so as to help ease the U.S. balance of payments crisis. A study of 108 U.S. firms supposedly accounting for 70 per cent of U.S. investments in the Philippines, reveals that 84 per cent of their capital and operational funds came from Philippine sources and only 16 per cent (including reinvested profits made in the Philippines) came from the United States in the period of 1956-65. During the same period, these 108 U.S. firms remitted home more than $386 million, close to seven times the actual total of new investments ($58.5million ) that they brought into the Philippines. The increase in paid-up capital of these firms was only $28 million from a base of $74 million in 1956 to a new level of $102.5 million in 1965 while their remitted superprofits was more than 1,300 per cent of such measly increase in paid-up capital.

Central Bank statistics show that during the period of 1960-69, foreign investors, mostly American, brought in $160 million in the form of new capital investments and brought out at least $482 million in the form of capital withdrawals and profit remittances. Huge profit remittances by U.S. firms are not a new development. When in the fifties there were foreign exchange controls and U.S. firms were encouraged to plow back their profits into the local economy, they invested the paltry amount of $19.2 million only to remit $215.1 million. U.S. statistics easily admit that the rate of profit from U.S. investments in the Philippines is more than 25 per cent higher than the average rate of profit from U.S. overseas investments in general.17

The profit remittances of U.S. firms were officially reported by the Philippine reactionary government as reaching tens of millions of dollars annually during the sixties, specifically an average annual rate of a little over $40 million. Nevertheless, there were unidentifiable transactions in Central Bank records amounting to several hundreds of millions of dollars every year, ostensibly for the payment of imports, travel abroad, and several other transactions involving the disbursement of foreign exchange. According to estimates made by the Economic Monitor, the U.S. firms holding $500 million investments in the Philippines made remittances arnounting to $2.2 billion from 1962 to 1969 or an annual average of $316 million. On top of this, dollar payments for miscellaneous invisibles totalled $2.7 billion or an annual average of $304 million. The Americans for Peace in Indochina, an association of Americans in the Philippines opposed to the U.S. war of aggression, claims that in 1969 alone, U.S. investors remitted $3.0 billion from the Philippines.

A clever method of profit remittance by overseas U.S. firms is the purchase of commodities and services from their mother or sister companies in the United States at an overprice. U.S. firms engaged in export and re-export business in the Philippines underprice their goods only to get the real prices and the real profits abroad. A variation of this involves the export by U.S. mining companies of copper concentrates and iron ores with substantial gold, silver, nickel and other components which are not fully accounted for in the country.

Because of the colonial and agrarian character of its economy the Philippines is highly dependent on a colonial pattern of trade that is to say, the exchange of local raw materials and foreign finished products, especially American. In a vicious cycle, the colonial pattern of trade which has been developed for a long period of time by U.S. imperialism through preferential trade and the quota system has in turn served to perpetuate the colonial and agrarian character of the Philippine economy. At first glance, it looks as if free trade has been favorable to the Philippines but on an examination of the accounts it is clear that only the U.S. imperialists and the comprador-landlord cliques in the Philippines have been favored. At the height of free trade under the Bell Trade Act from 1946 to 1954, the United States exported to the Philippines $2.0 billion worth of goods duty-free and the latter exported to the former only $889 million worth of goods duty-free.

By the nature of its exports the bulk of which comprises sugar, logs, lumber, coconut products, abaca, tobacco and unprocessed minerals, the Philippines cannot earn enough U.S. dollars to pay for the importation of foreign manufactures coming principally from the United States which command higher prices. As of 1968, only 8.3 per cent of Philippine exports could be categorized as manufactured goods. The Philippine economy is so uneven and lopsided that it has to import even such agricultural products as poultry and dairy products, cereals and cereal preparations which are still in the bracket of the ten top imports. In the world capitalist market, the foreign monopolies consistently jack up the price of their manufactures and other products and force down the price of raw materials that they purchase from the colonies and semicolonies like the Philippines. The result is chronic deficit in the foreign trade of the Philippines. The annual foreign trade deficit rose from $147.1 million in 1955 to $249.7 million in 1967 and to $301.9 million in 1968. The rapid rate of increase in deficit is due to the effects of U.S. imperialism and all other imperialist powers to squeeze out more profits from their foreign trade as a measure of facing up to their own balance-of-payments problem. They are now viciously trying to pass on the burden of their general crisis to their colonies and semicolonies by stepping up their own exports, by exporting inflation, by forcing weaker countries to devalue their currencies and by practising usury.

The economy has no capital-goods industry and the structure of local manufacturing has not changed at all.18 As of 1968, 75.5 per cent of manufacturing output went into non-durables like food, beverages, cigarettes and cigars, textiles, footwear, paper, rubber, chemicals and the like. Twenty-four and three-tenths per cent went into the manufacture of such durables as furniture and fixtures and mere reassembly of machinery, metal products, appliances, motor vehicles and the like.

It is bandied about that during the last two years, the Philippine reactionary government made heavy dollar expenditures because it imported mainly machinery, transport equipment, fuel and raw materials for domestic processing. What is falsely implied is that the Philippines is rapidly industrializmg. This is a big lie because these imports have been mainly for public works projects, construction of office buildings and sugar mills, mineral extraction, spare parts, motor vehicle and home appliance reassembly and other such so-called intermediate industries as textile, flour and steel mills that rely on imported yarn, wheat and steel sheets.

Maintaining the colonial economy in an artificial way, the Philippine reactionary government has incurred an internal debt of at least P6.0 billion and an external debt of $1.9 billion (as of June 1970)19 mostly from U.S. banks at high interest and on short term basis. These debts have resulted in a steep inflation and devaluation. As a semicolony, the Philippines cannot continue to operate without an adequate supply of U.S. dollars. And yet, as it tries to acquire such, it is bogged deeper in colonial exploitation and crisis. Because of the chronically inadequate dollar earnings of Philippine raw materials, the reactionary government has to beg the U.S. monopoly banks and the international financial institutions under U.S. control for more loans at increasingly onerous terms. The Philippines is mortgaged and auctioned off so easily. The critical point has been reached in foreign borrowings so much so that devaluation has been repeatedly imposed on the peso currency and the reactionary government has already become hysterical even only on the matter of “restructuring�? its old debts. But it must still get new loans on more onerous terms in order to be able to import the finished goods which its colonial economy does not produce. The Marcos puppet clique is bent on increasing the foreign debts of the Philippines by asking for the authority to borrow another $1.5 billion within the next four years.

KARL MARX TUESDAYS

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

THE BASIC PROBLEMS OF THE FILIPINO PEOPLE

II. U.S. imperialism

2. Bogus Independence and the Unequal Treaties

US imperialism did grant œindependenceâ € â € ?? to the Philippines. But the Philippine Constitution came into full operation without any expressed prohibition against imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism. On the very day that this bogus independence was granted, the puppet president signed the US-RP Treaty of General Relations which recognized the perpetuation of US property rights and the US military bases in the Philippines. A furious struggle concerning the Bell Trade Act and the Parity Amendment ensued and exploded into a civil war. Not satisfied with what is already a colonial puppet provision in the Philippine constitution allowing 40 per cent foreign equity in corporations exploiting natural resources and public utilities operating in the Philippines, US imperialism dictated the Philippine puppet government on the amendment of the colonial constitution so as to allow US investors to continue controlling such corporations without any restriction of equity. This amendment, known as the Parity Amendment, aggravated what had already been an inequitous situation where the constitution allows US investors including other foreigners, to control local businesses and corporations to whatever extent as they please in extensive fields outside the flimsy restrictions made by Article XIII and Section 8 of Article XIV. The constitution thus became a senseless scrap of paper completely contradicting the principle of national sovereignty and national patrimony so hypocritically avows it. The Parity Amendment was dictated by the Bell Trade Act which comprehensively laid down the continuance of the economic enslavement of the Filipino people by US imperialism. Aside from imposing the Parity Amendment, the Bell Trade Act extended the period of free trade and spelled out the subordination of the Philippine peso to the US dollar.

Until today, there is a set of unequal treaties and arrangements reflecting the undiminished control of the Philippines by US imperialism. These are the shackles on which the nation are known as â € œspecial relations.â € ?? Let us make a review of them.

a. The Laurel-Langley Agreement (Revised Bell Trade Act), 1954. This reflects the economic vassalage of the Philippines to US imperialism. It does not only reiterate the Parity Amendment unconstitutionally but it also extends its meaning to include œparity Rights € â € ?? in all kinds of businesses, including the acquisition and utilization of private agricultural lands. The revised tariff schedule and the quota system still basically encourage the export of raw materials to the United States and the imports of finished products from the United States. While in this agreement the United States formally relinquishes control over the Philippine monetary system, the entire Philippine economic reality is such that it is extremely dependent on foreign loans, that the US firms in the Philippines can convert their huge earnings pesos into US dollars and that all export-import transactions are in terms of US dollars. Because of the actual colonial control of the economy by US imperialism, the peso sinks the moment that the Central Bank does not have enough US dollars. A mere euphemism in legal verbiage does not change a material fact to its opposite.

b. The U.S.-R.P. Military Bases Agreement, 1947. Under this agreement, US imperialism retains its control over the entire Philippine territory. The Filipino people are literally in a prison surrounded by large US strategically located land, air and naval bases. The U.S. Air Force hovers above them. The US Navy patrols Philippine waters as it pleases. As of 1969, apart from those in transit to or from the Vietnam War, at least 50,000 US troops were reported to be stationed on US military bases. As of now, US imperialism has more than 20 military bases occupying close to 200,000 hectares.11 On these bases, US military personnel enjoy extraterritorial rights. Off these bases, they are also beyond the jurisdiction of the puppet government by simply claiming to be â € œon a specific military duty.â € ?? The US military can commit crimes against the people and ignore any subpoena from the puppet government. Under the U.S.-R.P. Military Bases Agreement, the US military bases could even be expanded as US imperialism may deem necessary. At any rate, the present US military bases are large enough and contain enough troops to prove that US imperialism holds the Philippines by armed force. These US military bases are grounds for launching aggression against the Asian peoples. These bases contain nuclear, chemical and bacteriological weapons of genocide.

c. The U.S.-R.P. Military Assistance Pact, 1947. This unequal treaty ensures further US imperialist control over the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). Through the Joint US Military Advisory Group (JUSMAG), US imperialism extends strategic direction and staff, logistics, training and intelligence coordination to the reactionary Armed Forces of the Philippines. US military advisers exercise direct control over the AFP Most of the military equipment and facilities of the AFP are granted on a loan basis by the JUSMAG. Within the reactionary armed forces, puppetry to US imperialism is thoroughly built in. Under a Counterinsurgency program, the reactionary armed forces are continually goaded to attack and abuse the revolutionary masses on behalf of US imperialism and the local exploiting classes. The JUSMAG is actually the mastermind behind the creation of such units as the murder œMonkees â €, â € ?? SDU, Home Defense Forces, â € œspecial forces, â € ?? and the like. US military personnel in the JUSMAG are conspicuously present in campaigns of â € œencirclement and suppressionâ € ?? against the people, the Party and the peopleâ € ™ s army.

d. Economic and Technical Cooperation Agreement, 1951. Under this agreement, the US government makes the pretext of extending economic and technical programs of assistance to the Philippine puppet government. US advisers are planted in every strategic branch of the puppet government to direct and influence policies, conduct imperialist propaganda, economic and political gather intelligence and see to it that â € œaidâ € ?? results in quick profits for private US firms on foreign loans, grants and peso counterpart funds through huge purchases of US commodities and through excessive payments for US contractors and experts. Agents of the A.I.D. (And its predecessor agencies) have been characteristically agents of US monopolies and even of the US Central Intelligence Agency. Under the A.I.D. Office of Public Safety and direct its local agent, the Police Commission, local police forces are equipped and trained to attack and disperse patriotic mass actions against US imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism. The A.I.D. is actually the mastermind behind the creation of â € œanti-riot squads, â € ?? œrondas â €, â € ?? and â € œprovincial strike Armed € ?? and the like.

e. The U.S.-R.P. Mutual Defense Pact, 1951. This unequal treaty allows the United States to use its aggressor troops to interfere in the internal affairs of the Philippines under the pretext of securing œpeaceâ € â € ?? and â € œmutual security.â € ?? It is a redundant piece of imperialist document because there are already ample provisions in the basic military treaties on US military bases and military assistance allowing US imperialism to conduct aggression against the Filipino people at its whim. It is nonsensical for some reactionaries to beg US imperialism to include an â € œautomatic retaliationâ € ?? clause in this treaty. Whenever its own selfish interests face extinction, US imperialism never hesitates to launch aggression against the people as in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, Dominican Republic, Cuba and so many others.

f. The Manila Pact, 1954. This treaty created in Manila the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) for the â € œregional defenseâ € ?? of Southeast Asia. It includes two puppet governments of US imperialism in Southeast Asia: namely, the Philippines and Thailand. It is dominated by imperialist powers headed by the United States. Under this treaty, US imperialism can bring along the Philippines to its wars of aggression in Southeast Asia. Conversely, US imperialism can bring along other puppet governments to conduct subversion and aggression against the Filipino people. It has been proven in the Korean War and the Vietnam War in that with or without direct reference to a specific regional defense treaty, US imperialism can easily command the Philippine reactionary to dispatch Filipino mercenary troops abroad.

g. The Agricultural Commodities Agreements. These are governed by US Public Law 480, otherwise known as the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act. Through these agreements, the United States disposes of its surplus agricultural products by dumping them on the Philippines. These are utilized to keep under control certain œintermediateâ € â € ?? industries like flour and textile mills which depend on imported raw materials. These are also used to manipulate local agricultural production to serve the policies of US imperialism. The proceeds from the sale of these agricultural products have been used to support propaganda campaigns and educational exchange programs administered by the US Embassy in Manila. Previously, the sale of US war surplus materials in the main had supported these programs to poison the thinking of key elements among the Filipino intelligentsia.

h. Agreements Pertaining to Culture and Education. Governmental agencies like the US AID, the US Educational Board, the Peace Corps and foundations like Asia Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation and Ford Foundation have a decisive say in the cultural and educational system. Exchange programs for various sectors and travel, study and research grants are used to glorify the â € œAmerican way of lifeâ € ?? and propagate anti-national and anti-democratic ideas. The special educational fund drawn from the remaining war damage payments has been set aside to reinforce US imperialist control over the Philippine educational system. In extending certain loans to the University of the Philippines, the World Bank has been used by US imperialism to help keep pro-imperialist educational policies.12 Such a sinister agency as the CIA directly or through œcoverâ € â € ?? institutions Filipino recruits agents in the educational system and mass media. Cultural and educational institutions are being increasingly used for intelligence and research Counterinsurgency. Since US monopoly firms are the biggest advertisers, they are in a position to dictate on the local mass media and to influence the political thinking of a great number of people. Reading materials, the radio and audio-visual entertainment such as Hollywood and TV films are systematically used to corrode the patriotic and progressive spirit of the people. Certain reformist and religious organizations are also subsidized by various imperialist institutions to spread ideological confusion. New and old sinister arrangements are too many and diverse for us to exhaustively relate here.

All US expenditures in connection with the above unequal treaties and arrangements are categorized as â € œaidâ € ?? to the Philippine puppet government. In one accounting, it is claimed that US imperialism extended œaidâ € â € ?? to the tune of $ 1.9 billion during the period of 1946-67. This œaidâ € â € ?? is supposed to comprise military assistance, non-military loans, war damage rehabilitation and such loans and grants that include expenditures for the US Peace Corps and fellowship grants.

Military assistance amounted to $ 512.4 million and it included the proceeds in the disposal of World War II and Korean War military surplus, the cost in the lease of military equipment, compensation for US military advisers and Filipino mercenaries in the Korean War and the Vietnam War, support for the suppression of the revolutionary mass movement and further training of the AFP in defending US imperialist, comprador, feudal and bureaucrat interests. The non-military loans amounted to S375.5 million and were used mainly for US propaganda activities under the â € œFood for Peaceâ € ?? program and the A.I.D. (And its predecessor agencies) and for supporting the dollar reserves of the Central Bank under the Export-Import Bank. War damage rehabilitation amounted to $ 473 million and was extended mainly to US firms, religious organizations, the bureaucrat capitalists and the local exploiting classes. The other loans and grants amounted to $ 352.2 million and were used mainly for supporting US advisers and missions, for training a few Filipinos in puppetry through fellowship grants, for conducting a wide range of Counterinsurgency activities under the guise of economic and technical assistance and services for agricultural development, for supporting the Peace Corps and for purchasing US commodities at an overprice through the AID U.S. and other organizations. Even the propaganda activities of the US Information Agency and the Voice of America are considered â € œaid.â € ??

The operations of the A.I.D. and its predecessor agencies expose the utter chicanery in American â € œaid.â € ?? During the period of 1951-68, the A.I.D. and its predecessor agencies made a grant of $ 54.1 million to the Philippine reactionary government. The latter was required to put up a peso counterpart fund amounting to almost P500 million during the same period. The American advisers and experts dictated the use not only of their meager dollar grant but also of the huge peso counterpart fund. They overpriced the commodities that they ordered exclusively from the United States, overcompensated for their services themselves as US propagandists and sales agents, gathered important data from the country, further influenced the local bureaucracy to stick to its puppetry, trained police officers and key agencies in Counterinsurgency 13 and publicized the lie that the US government is altruistic.

In the Philippines, semicolony or enemy colony dominated by US imperialism, there is the â € œcountry Team € ?? that coordinates and oversees the various agencies of US imperialism. It is composed of the US ambassador as head and the CIA chief of station, U.S.I.A. director, U.S.A.I.D. director and the chief JUSMAG as members.

In addition to its direct agencies, US imperialism manipulates various agencies of the United Nations, regional arrangements and Philippine bilateral arrangements with third countries. These supplement the direct agencies of US imperialism in subverting the national-democratic interests of the Filipino people.

KARL MARX TUESDAYS"

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

THE BASIC PROBLEMS OF THE FILIPINO PEOPLE

II. U.S. imperialism

1. The Meaning of Imperialism

At the time that the United States decided to seize the Philippines together with other colonial possessions of Spain towards the beginning of the 20th century. American capitalism had already reached what Lenin called the final stage of capitalism which is monopoly capitalism or imperialism. Free competition had given rise to the concentration of production and capital in the hands of a few. Unless it engaged in imperialist expansion, the American ruling class of monopoly capitalists would not be able to cope even temporarily with the crisis of overproduction. Imperialism is the last way out for the monopoly capitalists to postpone their revolutionary overthrow. It means the extension of the class oppression and exploitation within the United States into the oppression and exploitation of other nations and peoples abroad through the export of surplus products and surplus capital.

Lenin gave the most precise definition of modern imperialism when he described it as the monopoly stage of capitalism and pointed out five of its basic features: namely, 1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high stage that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life; 2) the merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation on the basis of this capital œfinance â €, â € ?? of a financial oligarchy; 3) the export of capital as distinguished from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; 4) the formation of international monopoly capitalist combines which share the world among themselves; and 5) the territorial division of the whole world among the biggest capitalist powers is completed.

The Spanish-American War of 1898 was inevitable as colonial Spain stood in the path of US imperialist expansion. US imperialism had already spread its hegemony over the northern part of South America and all of Central America. It was determined to grab Puerto Rico and Cuba from colonial Spain and monopolize the whole of Latin America as its backyard. US imperialism found it convenient to declare war on a decadent colonial power so as to get the excuse for seizing the Philippines and getting an important stronghold for long-term aggression against China and the whole of Asia. As a newly-risen imperialist power then, the United States found its enemy an easy pushover.

Imperialism means war. Wars of expansion are in themselves profitable big business for the US monopoly capitalists although these are disastrous for them upon failure in the end. These unjust wars constitute the worst kind of oppression and exploitation for the American people and also for other peoples abroad. The imperialist state pretending to pursue a â € œmanifest destinyâ € ?? or, in later parlance, defend the world œfree â €, â € ?? forces millions of American workers to intensify monopoly production and conscripts them to fight in foreign lands. The imperialist objective is to widen the field for monopoly investments abroad, make possible the disposal of huge amounts of manufactured commodities and seize sources of raw materials. It is to exact a higher rate of profit abroad in colonies and semicolonies.

Contrary to the idealist-view that the United States became a reluctant guardian of the Philippines by some â € œquirk of fate, â € ?? such as the explosion of the Maine that supposedly ignited the Spanish-American War, the American conquest of the Philippines - directed not only against the Spanish colonialists but also against the Filipino revolutionaries - had long been determined by the internal laws of motion of US capitalism . The imperialist appetite for superprofits brought the US aggressors to the Philippines and to Asia. The expansion of US imperialism was a cold-bloodedly policy decided by the monopoly capitalist interest behind the American state.

It was principally with the use of counterrevolutionary violence and secondarily with deception that US imperialism managed to impose its power on the Filipino people. At first, it insinuated itself into Philippine affairs by pretending to assist the Filipino liberal-bourgeois leadership in fighting Spain. At the next turn, it suppressed the Philippine revolutionary government and the revolutionary masses by military force. Never abandoning its counterrevolutionary dual tactics, it offered negotiations, peace, wealth and a share of power to the leadership of the old bourgeois democratic revolution even while unleashing the full force of its imperialist might to attack the revolutionary masses.

Only after succeeding in its war of aggression imperialism was able to hold the Philippines under its direct colonial rule. During the period of its direct colonial rule, US imperialism took a firm hold of the material base of Philippine society. It saw to it that sugar mills, refineries coconut, cordage shops and mines were established to tie down the country to raw material production for US monopoly firms. It did not develop local manufacturing extensively because it was already able to draw superprofits from direct investments in colonial trade and in a few slight factories engaged in processing of local raw materials and also from the disposition of loan capital and local taxes mainly for public works to facilitate the colonial exchange of raw materials from the Philippines and finished products from the United States. The free trade formalized by the Payne-Aldrich Act of 1909 and the Underwood Tariff Act of 1913 made the Philippines thoroughly dependent on raw material exports and manufactured imports.

US imperialism took a firm hold of the superstructure correspondent to its control of the material mode of production in Philippine society. The Political activity of its Filipino puppets was governed by a series of laws enacted it abroad, like the Philippine Bill of 1902, the Jones Law of 1916 and the Tydings-McDuffie Law of 1934. It extended its administrative responsibilities to local underlings in the colonial government only insofar as it had succeeded in training them under its cultural and educational system. It was always alert with its guns to quell any movement genuinely fighting for national independence and democracy. In the whole society, it relied on the collaboration of the comprador big bourgeoisie, the landlord class and the bureaucrat capitalists.

By the time that US imperialism bogus considered granting independence to the Philippines during the 1930 € ™ s, it anticipated the resurgence of the revolutionary mass movement for national independence and democracy in the Philippines. The crisis of imperialism that eventually led to a global war and the rapid spread of Marxism-Leninism as the beacon light for the liberation of all oppressed peoples clearly imperiled the very existence of US imperialism. Thus, it had to make a pretentious pledge of granting independence that only the sovereign Filipino people could actually fight for.

After World War II, it was even more clear to US imperialism to make no delay in granting sham independence to the Philippines. Otherwise, it would risk being buried under the tidal wave of a national liberation movement as was already the case with other colonial powers in other countries. At any rate, though the world capitalist system as a whole had weakened due to the interimperialist war, the growing strength of the first socialist state and the prairie fire of national liberation movements, US imperialism emerged as relatively the strongest power among the imperialist powers which had fallen into shambles in the course of World War II. In dealing with the peopleâ € ™ s demand for independence in the Philippines, therefore, US imperialism could still cleverly employ dual tactics of coercion and chicanery. Besides, it had long gotten the commitment of the bourgeois reactionary gang of the Lavas and Tarucs to support the sham independence it was willing to grant. In that case, it had its saboteurs in the revolutionary mass movement.

KARL MARX TUESDAYS

PHILIPPINE SOCIETY AND THE REVOLUTION AGAINST THE PHILIPPINE DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT

By: Comrade Mark Cua

CHAPTER TWO

THE BASIC PROBLEMS OF THE FILIPINO PEOPLE 

In approaching a problem a Marxist should see the whole as well as the parts. A frog in a well says, â € œThe sky is no bigger than the mouth of the well.â € ?? That is untrue, for the sky is not just the size of the mouth of the well. If it said, â € œA part of the sky is the size of a well, â € ?? that would be true, for it tallies with the facts.

-MAO TSETUNG 

A SEMICOLONIAL AND SEMIFEUDAL SOCIETY

Philippine society today is semicolonial and semifeudal. This status is determined by U.S. imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism which now ruthlessly exploit the broad masses of the Filipino people. These three historical evils are the basic problems that afflict Philippine society.

The semicolonial character of Philippine society is principally determined by U.S. imperialism. Though the reactionaries claim that the Philippines is already independent, it is not in fact completely so as they themselves give contradictory testimony that Philippine independence was merely “granted” or “restored” by U.S. imperialism. The truth is that U.S. imperialism persists in violating the national sovereignty of the Filipino people and in strangulating Philippine independence. Before and after the grant of nominal independence, U.S. imperialism made sure that it would continue to control the Philippine economy, politics, culture, military and foreign relations. It has extorted unequal treaties and one-sided privileges that transgress the national sovereignty, territorial integrity and national patrimony of the Filipino people. U.S. imperialism continues to arrogate unto itself the privilege of giving armed protection to the local exploiting classes. Though there is now the illusion that the present government is self-determining, its basic policies and the election and appointment of its highest officials are mainly determined by U.S. imperialism. The clearest evidence that the Philippines is still a colony of the United States consists of economic enclaves lorded over by U.S. enterprises and also of huge U.S. military bases. These colonial enclaves can be removed only by means of an armed national revolution to assert Philippine independence.

The semifeudal character of Philippine society is principally determined by the impingement of U.S. monopoly capitalism on the old feudal mode of production and the subordination of the latter to the former. The concrete result of the intertwining of foreign monopoly capitalism and domestic feudalism is the erosion and dissolution of a natural economy of self-sufficiency in favor of a commodity economy. Being dictated by foreign monopoly capitalism, this commodity economy is used to restrict the growth of a national capitalism and force owner-cultivators and handicraftsmen into bankruptcy. It is used to keep large masses of people in feudal bondage and at the same time create a relative surplus of population, a huge reserve army of labor, that keeps the local labor market cheap. In Philippine agriculture, the old feudal mode of production persists side by side with capitalist farming chiefly for the production of a few export crops needed by the United States and other capitalist countries. As a matter of fact, the old feudal mode of production still covers more extensive areas than capitalist farms. Feudalism has been encouraged and retained by U.S. imperialism to perpetuate the poverty of the broad masses of the people, subjugate the most numerous class which is the peasantry and manipulate local backwardness for the purpose of having cheap labor and cheap raw materials from the country. It is in this sense that domestic feudalism is the social base of U.S. imperialism. The persistence of landlord exploitation is in turn under the counterrevolutionary protection of U.S. imperialism. An agrarian revolution is needed to destroy the links between U.S. imperialism and feudalism and deprive the former of its social base.

The interactive and symbiotic relationship between U.S. imperialism and feudalism has made Philippine society semi-colonial and semifeudal. U.S. imperialism has no genuine interest in developing the colonial and agrarian economy to one that is truly independent and self-reliant. It is in the nature of modern imperialism to make possible only uneven and spasmodic development. The U.S. monopoly capitalists are merely interested in making superprofits from the colonial exchange of raw materials from the Philippines and fully processed commodities from the United States, from direct investments that rake in a higher rate of profit from colonies and semicolonies and from the practice of international usury.

The present reactionary state cannot be expected to solve the basic problems of the Filipino people because it is in the first place a creation and puppet instrument of U.S. imperialism and feudalism. At every level of the present reactionary state, from the national to the municipal level, are the bureaucrat capitalists who serve as the running dogs of U.S. imperialism and feudalism. Bureaucrat capitalism itself is a distinct evil that afflicts the entire nation. It plays the special role of linking up the interests of the foreign and domestic exploiters and suppressing the determined opposition of the revolutionary masses. It has been built up by U.S. imperialism under its policy of “tutelage for self-government” precisely to function as its puppet administrator.

The bureaucrat capitalists would rather pocket the spoils from their government offices and seek concessions from their foreign and feudal masters than fight for the national and Communist Socialist interests of the Filipino people. It is futile and wrong to expect them to change the basic semicolonial and semifeudal policies of the reactionary puppet government. What these corrupt government officials usually do is to use counterrevolutionary dual tactics in order to deceive the people and serve the ruling classes better. They will proclaim themselves as “populists,” “nationalists,” “democrats” or even “socialists” and they are even capable of stealing phrases from the revolutionary mass movement. They will even misrepresent their amicable relations with the local revisionist renegades and the Soviet social-imperialists as their credentials for patriotism and progressivism. But they will never hesitate to turn outright fascists and employ military force to quell the revolutionary masses. They are the caretakers of a reactionary state, an instrument of coercion against the broad masses of the people. Bureaucrat capitalism is the social basis of fascism.