The Modes of Production, the ISAs, and the Filipino Worker

The Ideological State Apparatus (ISA), according to Althusser, is the method which changes minds. Institutions such as education, the churches, family, media, trade unions, and law are formally found outside the state control but serves to transmit the values of the state. Economic classes and their relations to each other in the modes of production of each progression historical period are important elements of society. The history of human society has five modes of production: Primitive, Slavery, Feudalism, Capitalism, and Socialism. In the primitive mode of production, there is cooperative relation among all human beings. Land is seen as a useless factor of production. Challenges during this era mostly came from nature. There is a lack of control over production. In slavery era, the mode of production is based on slave owners exploiting slave labour. The Master-Slave relationship is thus created. Under the feudal system, the landlord-serf relationship is created. The landlord owns the land and most of the produce, but the serf who is tied to the land comes with the land owned by the lords.  The capitalist system depicts Bourgeoisie-Proletariat relationship. The Bourgeoisie is the class that owns factories and other forms of capital while the Proletariat is the class that toils in their employment under the Bourgeoisie. This allows private ownership of mode of production. A capitalist system results to a decreased welfare for the working class. The Philippines has a mixed mode of production that showcases not a merit-based recognition but by virtue of social networks. The country is said to be in the intermediate stage of Feudalism and Capitalism.

What makes the Ideological State Apparatus a real danger to any society is its ability to discretely hide itself from plain sight and consequently settle in the private realm of life. The very same feature can be observed in the following scenarios. In the three century Spanish occupation in the country, why were the Filipinos three centuries late in staging their revolution to claim their liberty and freedom? The ISAs present in society in that particular time and space of Philippine history are perhaps pervasive and very much influential in its hold on the Filipino people so much so that it forces its subjects to accept without any questions or second thoughts.

There was one point that I have to both agree and disagree with. It was about the Philippine labourers being too rights-conscious and as a consequence, becomes an apparent detriment to productivity and efficiency of the said labourers. I agree that, indeed, the Philippine labour market is unproductive. The Big Mac Index is used to roughly estimate the productivity of workers across all countries using a standardized measure that is constant in all the countries, the quality and price of a McDonald’s Big Mac. Using this standard, the Philippines ranks as one of the most unproductive countries since it would take an average worker 88 minutes of work to earn a Big Mac while it would only take a Japanese worker 10 minutes. On the other hand, I have to disagree with the Filipino workers as being too rights-conscious. If one uses the daily Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) of each individual, of which will enable him to survive a day’s worth of basic needs, as a basis for wage levels, then one would soon find out that the minimum wage is almost always less than the daily COLA of an individual. I think, to live at the borders of poverty is more than enough justification of the workers to demand better wage levels and compensation. There is absolutely nothing wrong for an individual to earn his just compensation after a hard day’s work. (12/07/2010)

The Ideological State Apparatus and the Ignorance of the Filipino People

Conflict between the opposing social classes is said to be the motor of history. The inherent binary opposition of these classes will inevitably cause the oppressed class to stage a revolution against the ruling class. In a capitalist system, the opposing classes would be the capitalist or bourgeoisie and the working class or the proletariat. As what Marx iterated, this class struggle would always root from a material cause, better wages for the proletariat and higher profits for the bourgeoisie. Indeed, the proletariat class is seen as the heroes of society. They serve as the backbone of labour for the bourgeoisie. Without them, there is no hope for prosperity.

One would not have to look far for the demonization of the bourgeoisie in society. In our very own country, the rich is looked upon with much disdain. And yet, with the rich being stigmatized for their social status in the Philippines’ pseudo-Capitalist system, Capitalism should be first allowed to develop before the movement of socialism is fully accepted into the status quo. This sentiment was also shared by Mao Zedong during China’s Third Plenary Session of the Seventh Central Committee in 1952 wherein he criticized people who proposed eliminating capitalism and implementing socialism at a premature time. Even with the impending class revolution, there is always room for some elegance in the timeliness of revolution. The apt time to make the transition from a capitalist system to a socialist is said to be when the owners of production have already satiated with profits while the proletariat have none. Truly, this indicator of timeliness is both ruthless and brutal. Why should the oppressed wait for this vicious time to come if one could directly act upon this reality for one’s own liberty and freedom?

Louie Althusser provided a very concise explanation of the proletariat’s apparent disinterest in challenging the status quo of the mode of production. He neatly puts this proposition with his idea of the Ideological State Apparatus (ISA). He postulates that Ideology has a material aspect and, unlike that of Marx’s Dialectics, has a relative autonomy. The main purpose of the two top-most levels of the Ideological system aims to preserve the current relations of production. What is truly magnificent in this mechanism is its mechanism. Obedience and spot-on abidance to the status quo are achieved through implied coercion and undue influence for the part of the oppressed class. The ISA is said to operate in the private realms of life and derives its effectively on its ability to persuade a subject quietly. A Filipino, as one looks back in one’s history, will inevitably wonder why it took 330 years for the Filipino people to rebel against the Spanish colonizers.

I firmly agree with Professor Fernandez’s stand that today’s institution that holds the Filipinos by their throats each and every day is the broadcast media. Media has now become an effective ISA for retaining the current system of ignorance and fanaticism. Moreover, this institution has been very effective in keeping the Filipino in the dark. Only the peripheral events of society are reported and often, the essential events are left out of the daily news. Perhaps, if this vicious practice ensues, then the media should adapt two new slogans for their campaigns. The first would be, Ignorance is bliss and the second, Panatilihing bobo ngunit masaya ang mga Filipino sa pamamagitan ng aming programa.When will the time come that the Filipinos can liberate themselves from the chains that bound them and embrace the reality of truth, liberty, and freedom? (12/02/2010)

Capitalism Blues: Woes of a Capitalist State

The discussion on Marx and Engel’s Dialectics continued this class meeting with much gusto from Professor Fernandez. It was discussed that, unlike what the authors originally intended, their work resulted in a lot of varied interpretations. The true Marxist would correctly reason out that in the pyramid of societal thought, Ideology lies on top of two lower levels. Below it is the Politico-juridical Idea. Both of which make up the superficial and non-material component of this pyramid and collectively aims to reproduce the ideas of its base. On its base lie the relations of production and the forces of production. This base of society is said to be material aspect.

The knowledge of this pyramid of societal thought is critical in understanding Marx’s Dialectics. He reasons that it is an individual’s materialistic conditions define his consciousness. The State is said to be the prime promulgator of both the Idea and the Politico-juridical Idea. In order to topple the oppressive mechanism of capitalism, it would not be enough to abolish the base of society but rather, the current state should be brought down to accomplish this objective. Marx added that all rational nations would follow this kind of path en route to a change of a better mode of production: primitive mode of production – slavery – feudalism – capitalism – socialism.

One of the more interesting notes mentioned in class was Marx own economic upbringing. In his works, Marx would always fight for the rights of the proletariat or the working class so one would naturally attribute this behaviour to his empathizing for his fellow lower class. Surprisingly, Marx grew up in an affluent and a comfortable environment so it comes as a surprise that he became the champion for the proletariat class. Lastly, the oppressive nature of a capitalist mechanism was discussed. Written all over Marx’s Das Kapital is the implicit message that capitalism is both exploitative and oppressive to the working class. The only thing capitalism holds sacred is the profits that it earns. The passive role of the government in preserving the capitalist status quo also does not help the cause of the proletariats.

There were a lot of interesting insights raised in class this meeting. Let me comment on one of them. Professor Fernandez consistently pointed out the College of Business Administration (CBA) is a breeding site of professionals who are trained to exploit other people in their undertakings. I would respectfully disagree. Though we live in a capitalist environment, branding the CBA as such would be a great injustice to the college. Being a trained in the field of Economics which deals with the proper allocation of scarce resources and address issues inherent in an economy, I would argue that the CBA is not breeding human-exploiters but rather, a college that trains effective and efficient future businessmen who are not only concerned with making a profit but more importantly, who serve society by providing people with jobs and abiding with the state’s prescribed civic duties. They are trained to be future-managers who are trained to handle people in a manner that makes work worthwhile and meaningful. At the end of the day, every individual has to make a living. These CBA graduates are honed to become future leaders of their respective fields that not only care about making a profit, but also are concerned in generating jobs and opportunities for other people to also make a living. Though capitalism may be oppressive in some of its aspects, there is absolutely nothing wrong in trying to pursue a sustainable livelihood in the hopes of providing food to one’s family table at least three times a day. (11/30/2010)

I am a materialistic man living in a materialistic world.

Hegel’s Dialectical Idealism equates morality and ethics with rationality. Morality or the sense of what is right or wrong is quite different from the meaning of rationality which is almost synonymous with reasoning. Yet with their incongruence of meanings, Hegel argues that reason will lead one to believe that in order to attain freedom one must desire free will. By virtue of this insatiable desire for freedom, an individual will conceive the notion of society. Only inside the state can an individual realize one’s rationality. There is no freedom outside the boundaries of the state. Moral, true, and rational beings are said to reside in the said society. Hegel reasons that the created state would intermittently serve as an intermediate step for human beings to find their rationality. The state would ultimately serve its purpose by rationalizing one’s wants, needs, satisfactions. The next question tackled during class was that of that of a leader’s role in man’s new found state. It is said that a good leader is capable of understanding the events that occur within society, exemplifies moral ascendancy and, more importantly, can demand the same from his subordinates.

Feuerbach had another opinion on the primacy of thought first proposed by Hegel. In his work, On the Essence of Christianity, he proposes the opposite idea of Hegel’s Idealism and consequently postulates that man is the first thesis and not the logos. Karl Marx also shares the same view that the first thesis in man’s inception of a god and its anti-thesis is man’s search for one’s true essence as reflected in one’s own ideal self. Marx argues that it is the materialistic that guides the thesis. Marx emphasizes the primacy of material where man is very much material being full of material needs. Through one’s materialistic needs, man is able to generate the Idea.

Though I underwent a very conventional Catholic upbringing during my early days, I would agree completely with Marx’s statement that Religion is the opium of the masses. It is necessarily easier to give meaning to unexplainable events by rationalizing the existence of a higher entity. Having a Supreme Being lord over all of man’s whims and fortunes (and a lot more often, misfortunes) is simpler to believe than a world without one. The same escalation of commitment to this personal belief to a deity can also be attributed to the fact that it would be a lot easier for man to exist if one can trust an infallible Being who has constant access to their every desire and need. And as Professor Fernandez would nicely put it, Tamad mag-isip ang mga Filipino.

Indeed the same crooked logic can be found in the recent trenches of our history. EDSA Revolution. The late Cardinal Sin would readily attest that the Holy Mother is the prime mover of Philippine history and has mightily cast her grace into the unknowing consciousness of the Filipinos, but I beg to disagree. Applying Marx’s view on history, it does make sense that the Filipino consciousness was ‘awakened’ the moment their materialistic needs were unmet with the Estrada administration. The Catholic religion was conveniently exploited to fit the needs of these anti-government parties for an effective medium in which they can rationalize their subversive plot. To cap it all off, these concerned parties rationalized that it was God’s divine will for the former President Estrada to step down. In the realm of a materialistic world, nothing is held sacred, not even religion. Religion, in this case, was politicized to no end and, worse, was very effective in deceiving all unwitting and unwilling-to-think-critically Filipinos to a useless uprising in an otherwise stable society. (11/25/2010)

A ∩ A^c = ∅

Where did history start – with an idea or with a material? This question seems to be the stepping stone from which Friedrich Hegel’s Dialectical Idealism stems from. This thought is said to come from Plato’s earlier Dialectics. At the heart of Hegel’s Dialectics lies the core proposition that time started with an idea; an idea that exists solely for its existence and has a separate existence from that of the path of the time-space continuum. The question of how an individual becomes conscious of his faculty for consciousness was the starting point of Hegel’s Idealism. All conscious beings would inevitably create a relation consisting of an object and a subject.  The discussion of how an individual becomes a subject followed suit. Hegel postulates that in the realm of thought there exists a master – slave relationship wherein an individual can only be of two states; first is being the subject and thus, the master in that relationship and second is being the object which the master-subject subjugates over. As Professor Fernandez puts it neatly, In the realm of knowing, one becomes a master if information is tested against rationality.

Only now that I look back into last meeting’s discussion that I fully appreciate the full spectrum of the possible applications of Hegel’s Dialectical Idealism and the theory of the construction of the subject. If one would look closely at the master-slave relationship that exists between the object-subject link, one would notice the most fundamental drive of all human existence. All human beings live to win and have the propensity to objectify. Delving deeper into this discussion, one would see its dire implication on the Spanish colonization of the Philippine archipelago. The Filipinos, at the time, greatly outnumber their colonizers and still kept allowed themselves to be subjugated under the Spanish rule. This historical tragedy of Filipino desistance greatly concerned and angered Rizal during his time. Indeed, the three century Spanish rule of the archipelago capitalized on this fact. Knowledge will make you free and ignorance is the greatest enslaver.

Hegel’s Idealism would eventually take us with the three laws of logic: the law of identity, the law of contradiction, and the law of extended middle. The law of identity was the focal point of discussion for the rest of the class. Hegel again states that the first law of logic (law of identity) was grossly unacceptable since it does not justly represent the true nature of reality. Hegel argues that the law of identity should be that of Statistics’ own law of complement which neatly gives this identity:  or simply, A and Not A is equal to null. This was rather different than what was earlier proposed that A is just equal to A. An object would inevitably undergo change and would not be the same object after that change. As the Greek philosopher Heraclitus puts it, You cannot step twice into the same river.

Hegel’s Dialectical Idealism plays an important role in Rizal’s understanding of history. In Hegel’s Idealism, there is a thesis, an anti-thesis, and a synthesis where the last reconciles the contradiction of the first two. A being becomes conscious of his consciousness only through material consciousness where the Idea becomes the conscious of the self. In order for man to attain his rationality, one should be conscious of his consciousness. Rizal’s criticism of the Filipinos during the Spanish occupation is that Filipinos lacked the capacity to fully synthesize all the contradictions offered by the church and the real state of being. The Filipinos’ inability to reconcile all these contradictions became his own enslavement and their own downfall. (11/23/2010)

History is the becoming.

History can be also be defined as the compilation of “relevant” events wherein the said events provided the tipping point for one era to shift to the next. As for whose relevance history serves its purpose was previously discussed in earlier articles. Moving on, history is said to highlight all the “important” events that caused a disturbance in the space & time continuum. Scholastic philosophy provided the theory of history with its earliest material. St. Augustine of Hippo who lived in 354 AD called history as the unfolding of the grand plan of God for the human species and for all Creation. Not until the Industrial Revolution would this philosophy weaken and be replaced with another theory.

Flash-forward to the 18^th century, the people of Europe has now shifted their focus from a spiritual stance to a more materialistic culture. With the Industrial Revolution, the people of Europe preoccupied themselves with the rigorous building of canals, roads, and railways as well as the mechanization of the previous labour-intensive industries. For the first time, buildings, factories, and machines were being built instead of churches. Coupled with these drastic changes of time, the question of primacy was born. Questions such as Where did history start from?, Did the universe start from an materialistic beginning?, and If not, is it possible that a supreme being did indeed create the universe that we know? brewed in the imaginations of philosophers of that era. One such philosopher was Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel who theorized the Dialectical Idealism. Dialectical Idealism simply states that there is a universal history and that the consciousness of human beings reigned supreme. His Idealism is a reiteration of the Greek’s dialectics.

The overlying theme for this discussion can be summed into this simple question. Which of the two best represents the true state of being, Rationality or Religion? This question has long been a source of arguments and countless wars. Indeed, this conflict would lead us to a number of practical realizations. First, the monarchic system has always been beset with the irrationality that is associated with the transfer of administrative power from one generation to the next with the illogical explanation hinged supposedly on divine providence. Even at the dawn of mankind (as in the version of the Creation story), rationality is at war with religion. The concept of original sin is the epitome of this conflict. At its most basic idea, knowledge or possession thereof is not necessarily wrong, but as the creation story would later point out, it is indeed a sin to bear knowledge and a virtue to be ignorant. Scholastic philosophy is best characterized by its simplistic and most often, belittling attitude towards the truth. The church, in its search for its own truth, puts so much virtue in moral obedience and completely neglects man’s liberty.

Rationality is the best answer to the supposed lies of religion. If history is indeed the becoming, then it should move past the imperfections of scholastic philosophy and evolve, much like it did with the advent of Hegel’s Dialectical Idealism. Though still rough around the edges, Hegel’s Idealism should become a crucial stepping stone for future theories. History is the becoming, a slice in the time and space continuum. It should not be laced with bias based on hokum and religious fanaticism, but rather with an open mind and a critical thought. History is the becoming since it is the progressive movement of people towards their historic goal of freedom and a better form of life. So much for St. Augustine and his City of God. (11/18/2010)

Oblation: Mi Ultimo Adios

The Oblation monument has always been the symbol associated with University of the Philippines system. Now, in my fourth and last year as an undergraduate student in the university I have never bothered to examine closely this iconic symbol and what it truly represents. As for this paper’s primary focus, Professor Fernandez asked the class to visit the Oblation and see for ourselves the inscriptions made on the monument. Only now that I’ve seen for my own eyes the inscriptions that I realize its utmost importance to last meeting’s discussion. Inscribed on the four sides of the Oblation is the second stanza of Jose Rizal’s Mi Ultimo Adios.

The nature of history as being a continuum composed of events across time & space and the recording of these specific slices of time was first discussed. Conventional history typically concerned itself with the latter and, as such, it busied itself with what’s, who’s, where’s, and when’s of an event. This formal and rigid perspective of history limits the viewers with only the most pertinent details and does not necessarily show the interplay of the string of past events leading to a significant episode and all the other implications it may have in future periods. Questions on who makes history as well to whose perspective history is deemed important were also discussed. It turns out that recorded history always does follow a similar pattern that patronizes the victors as well as the elites. Vilfredo Pareto aptly compared the process wherein the elite class greatly influences history-making to a primeval scene of lions being surrounded by foxes. Only the strong & influential (at that time) gets to decide how history should be written and most often, it is often written in their favor. Indeed, relying on hard facts & dates of a particular event robs the viewer the insatiable pleasure of realizing the interplay of the past to the present and the repercussions of the present to the future. To “educate” and “awaken” the socially conscious Filipino, history should definitely be seen as a continuum of events that are interconnected and intertwined with each other. The importance of seeing history as a continuum of events rather than just snippets of separate occurrences with the particular focus on their details are appropriately captured with the old Tagalog saying: Ang hindi (marunong) lumingon sa pinanggalingan, di makararatíng sa paroroonan. By seeing the connections and interplay of all these events, should lead all socially conscious Filipinos to recognize their place and role in history.

Perhaps, the greatest realization I have made with all these discussions is that of the reason behind the inscription of Rizal’s Mi Ultimo Adios on the four bases of the Oblation. It all makes sense. The Oblation was made by Guillermo E. Tolentino to depict the ultimate gesture of sacrificial offering of service to the country and its people. Mi Ultimo Adios was written by Rizal before delivering his greatest service to the country. Together, they fit perfectly to represent what all Filipinos should aspire to become: socially conscious and responsible individuals that are ultimately geared toward the promulgation of nationalism, liberty, and democracy. (11/12/2010)

Si Rizal at ang Kasaysayan (Filipino entry)

Bakit nga ba higit na mahalagang pag aralan ang pambansang bayani ng bansa? Ito ang unang tanong na humarap sa klase sa unang pagkikita ng Philippine Institutions 100 (PI 100). Diretso at makabuluhang siyasatin ang dahilan kung bakit kinakailangang magbalik-tanaw sa buhay at sa mga aral mula sa mga isinulat ni Dr. Jose Rizal. Ngunit bago pa natin simulan ang paghanap ng kasagutan nito, napakahalagang tingnan muna ang batas na nagtataguyod ng Rizal Law sa saligang batas ng Pilipinas. Naisabatas ang RA 1425 o maskilala bilang Batas Rizal na naglalayong pagaralan ng mga estudyanteng kolehiyo ang buhay at nilathalang gawain sa konteksto ng kapanahunan ni Rizal. Nilalayon din ng Batas Rizal na ipaunawa sa mga magaaral ang kanilang mga sarili bilang isang prospektibong nasiyonalista, liberalista, at democratiko sa konteksto ng kasalukuyang panahon.

Tunay ngang napakahalagang pagaralan ang kasaysayan sapagkat sa pamamagitan ng disiplinang ito nagbibigyan ang madla ng lens o salamin na maaaring magamit sa pagtingin sa tunay na estado ng isang lipunan. Gamit ang lens ng kasaysayan, nagbibigyan ng pagkakataon ang lahat na maging kritikal at mapanuri sa mga bagay-bagay na nagaganap sa kani-kanilang mga bayan. Ang kasaysayan ay mas angkop tingnan bilang isang lipo ng mga pangyayari na resulta ng nakaraan at siya na mang magiging dahilan ng pangyayari sa kinakaharap. Kung ganito lamang ang paiiraling pagtingin sa kasaysayan ay marahil mas mauunawan ng mga Filipino ang kani-kanilang lugar at papel na dapat gagampanan sa kasaysayang atin namang isinusulat. Sang-ayon ako na mas makakabuti sa kinabukasan ng ating bayan kung wasto ang ating pagtingin sa ating kasaysayan.

Ano nga ba ang isang bayani? Nasa parehong antas ba ng kabayihan sina Rizal, Dolphy’t Manny Pacquiao? Ano ba ang pinagkaiba ng mga taong nabanggit? At huli’t marahil ang pinakaimportanteng katanungan, sino nga ba ang isang Filipinong bayani sa ating panahon ngayon? Buhat ng mga katanungang ito, mainam na lalabas ang tunay na pagtingin ng mga Filipino sa nasyonalismo’t kabayanihan. Sa panahong ini-idolo at higit na hinahangaan ng nakakaraming Filipino ang isang boksingerong nakasalalay ang dangal sa lakas ng kamao at dahas ng pagsuntok, tila’y nabaon na sa limot ang kagalingan at sakripisiyo ng ating mahal na si Jose Rizal. Malamang ay gumugulong na sa kaniyang kabaong si Jose Rizal kung makikita lamang niya ang kahibangan sa pagsamba ng mga Filipino sa naturang pambansang kamao. Maihahalintulad din sa parehong pagtingin ang pagpaparangal kay Dolphy ng Malacañang. Wala namang masama sa pagbibigay parangal sa isang artista ngunit marami itong nabubuksang iba pang mga mahahalagang katanungan. Ganoon na lang ba makakalimutin ang mga Filipino sa kanyang nakaraan na hinde na niya napaparangalan ang kaniyang mahuhusay na manunulat, mga iskulptor at iba pang alagad ng sining? Marahil ay dapat pag-aralan ng bawat Filipino ang PI 100 nang maliwanagan nang husto sa mga usaping tutukoy kung sino nga ba ang isang bayaning Filipino. (11/09/2010)

Change of topic, change of scenery.

For the next few months, I will be posting some of my articles in my Philippine Institutions 100 (PI 100) class in this blog. I hope it would enlighten you as much as I was while working on them. Much thanks to my professor, Prof. Albina Peczon Fernandez for poisoning our most treasured beliefs with the raw and unexpurgated truth. This is also for you, ma'am.