We are a Fascist/Corporatist State!

This is the pedagogical pillar of Fascism and Socialism in the Philippines.

The tragic, devastating truth— that which could intellectually liberate Filipinos who have been long held in bondage by welfare/collectivist ideology– that Filipino intellectuals and legal luminaries don’t know or don’t want you to know is that the country’s New Constitution is strongly consistent with the tenets of FASCISM or CORPORATISM.

I believe that every schooled person should be able to grasp at least the basic or fundamental importance (or concept and purpose) of Definition: to keep cognitive order– e.i., for man to think and to think properly. The main purpose of definition is not really to describe or explain the meaning of words or terms, but to differentiate a concept from all other concepts and state the differences between units and/or existents. Thus, political terms like Socialism, Capitalism and Fascism have their own distinct meanings or definitions.

The definition of Fascism, which is an abstraction, must be based on the principles and doctrines postulated by its proponents. You cannot simply create your own definition of Fascism. 

I must repeat: Since Fascism is both an abstraction and a political theory, its definition must be purely based on the principles and doctrines laid down by its creators.

This suggests that anyone can create his own political theory or political term so long as he’s able to set its principles and doctrines, and differentiate it with other theories or concepts. This is what statist philosophers such as Karl Marx, Benito Mussolini, John Rawls, among others, did. For example, the Marxist revisionists who disagreed with some of Karl Marx’s doctrines created their own “isms”. That’s why we now hear political terms like Trotskyism, Leninism, Maoism, etc. In fact, UP’s most prominent professor, JoMa Sison, can also create his own Marxist-leaning “ism” and call it “JoMaism”.

The important concept to remember is: Abstractions do not exist; only concretes exist.

The Frankfurt School Marxist theorists made it part of their critical-theory agenda to demonize Capitalism by associating it with Fascism. Today a lot of half-wit Marxists went overboard by equating Fascism with Capitalism without even properly defining their own terms. (Read related blog: Destroying the Leftist Canard that Fascism is Capitalism)

The truth is, Fascism rejects Capitalism and Individualism. According to its proponent Benito Mussolini, Fascism is “anti-individualistic”, as “[t]he Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism [or libertarianism, as it’s also called] that denied the State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts the rights of the State… If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government.”

Fascism regards the individual as a means to achieve statist ends (e.g., the greater good, common good, summum bonum, public or national interest, etc.) It is a collectivist and anti-individualist social and economic system, and this is where a lot of people, particularly academic researchers and so-called intellectuals, get more confused.

What is collectivism and individualism? Collectivism is the idea or social system that rejects individual rights and subordinates the individual to the State. Individualism is founded on the principles of individual rights. It upholds man’s rights to life, liberty and property. It holds that you own your life and nobody has the right to take it away from you without due process. It’s not about rejecting society or living in isolation. By contrast, collectivism states that the State knows best and has the right to infringe upon your rights and liberty for the sake of the greater good or common good. 

First-rate collectivists, like Marx, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Adolf Hitler, among others, somehow understood these basic concepts. Their collectivism was based on moral ground.

However, allow me to clarify and debunk the Left’s propaganda that Fascism means the rule of the capitalists or corporations. First, corporations and capitalists are not synonymous. This merely proves the anti-conceptual and anti-Definition mentality of the brain-dead leftists. That’s not how Mussolini envisioned Fascism. Read his book titled The Doctrine of Fascism to properly educate yourselves, brain-dead comrades.

Fascism, which is also known as Corporatism, does not mean political rule by Corporations. Since Fascism regards men or individuals as political and economic tools to achieve the goals of the State, it also regards the private sector as a means (both political and economic) to preserve and maintain political power. This is why the goal of Fascism is state control of corporations, or the establishments of “syndicates of industry, agriculture, commerce, maritime and air transport, land and inland waterway transit and banking, with intellectuals and artisans being grouped in a seventh syndicate of their own.”

Mussolini’s Corporatism simply means organizing corporations and labor into syndicates under the rule of “the leader” or Duce. Thus, Fascism is the rule of the Duce or a political power (e.g., a dictator or a council of politicians); the ones being ruled or governed include corporations, industries, intellectuals, and the entire population.

The quintessential example of modern-day Fascist is New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who recently said: “I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom.”

In the Philippines, most politicians are Corporatists. Observe that the Fascists and the Communists agree with each other when it comes to the provision of welfare programs (e.g., Conditional Cash  Transfer, Universal Health Care, Population Control programs, etc.) or enactment of welfare laws like the Reproductive Health law. The fight between the Fascists and Socialists is mainly focused on the role/function of the State. The Fascists simply want to establish a syndicate of industries and private and semi-private sectors to be able to finance its political programs according to the political program of the Duce, whereas the Socialists want absolute control of the mode of production to allegedly empower the proletarian class according to the political program of the dictator or ruling one-party elite.

Both Socialism and Fascism are collectivist or statist social systems. One fundamental difference between these two isms is how they view property ownership and the role of government. Socialism seeks to nationalize all property, while Fascism demands State control of property implicitly, by requiring property owners to exploit their property in the “national interest”. However, both systems agree that the purpose is to serve the welfare of the poor and the greater good. Under Fascism, property ownership is given as a “grant” that may be revoked by the State should the business or property owner fail to meet certain ‘ownership’ conditions.

Another fundamental difference is that socialism has an internationalist agenda, while Fascism is a nationalist ideology. But this particular distinction is not absolute, because it could be easily modified by either system’s political practitioners.

Under socialism the means of production are owned or controlled by the all-powerful State, whereas Fascism permits private ownership of not only real property but also private firms and industries so long as corporate entities are compliant with the State’s economist policies and rules.

Now, why did I say that the Philippines’ 1987 Constitution is fascistic? My answer is, READ THE CHARTER.

Let me just give you the following evidence to prove my claim.

1. The Constitution treats or considers land ownership as a political privilege or grant. If you happen to own a land that sits on potential mineral deposits, the government automatically becomes the rightful owner of that property because of Section 1, Art. 12 of the Charter. By contrast, the American Constitution, which is an individualist charter, guarantees the right of Americans to own the minerals beneath the land. No other nation allows its citizens to own the minerals beneath the land. The country’s statist land ownership doctrine was inspired by Spain’s Regalian doctrine, a primitive, royalist concept, which has all the trappings of European collectivism or statism.

Section 2, Art. 12 of the 1987 Constitution provides:

“All lands of the public domain, waters, minerals, coal, petroleum, and other mineral oils, all forces of potential energy, fisheries, forests or timber, wildlife, flora and fauna, and other natural resources are owned by the State. With the exception of agricultural lands, all other natural resources shall not be alienated.

That provision alone makes the State the owner of at least 60 percent of the country’s landholdings. Section 3, Article 12 classifies lands of the public domain into agricultural, forest or timber, mineral lands and national parks. The same provision empowers the government, through the Congress, to classify agricultural lands “according to the uses to which they may be devoted”. This suggests that this provision is not self-executing, as it needs an enabling law for its execution.  Filipinos can only transfer, by sale or lease, agricultural lands.

The same provision also states:

“Private corporations or associations may not hold such alienable lands of the public domain except by lease, for a period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and not to exceed one thousand hectares in area.”

Why is the case? I’ll explain the reason below.

This provision proves that Congress is also given a “central planning” power/authority:

“Taking into account the requirements of conservation, ecology, and development, and subject to the requirements of agrarian reform, the Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands of the public domain which may be acquired, developed, held, or leased and the conditions therefor.”

The Constitution prescribes the area or size of land you can own. It also bars foreigners from owning real property.

Supporting provision: “Citizens of the Philippines may lease not more than five hundred hectares, or acquire not more than twelve hectares thereof, by purchase, homestead, or grant.”

In my humble opinion, such a provision was inspired by the “social justice” principle of the Charter under Article 13, which gives the Congress the power “highest priority to the enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the common good.” This means that the State has the power to “regulate the acquisition, ownership, use, and disposition of property and its increments.”

2. In terms of how it treats businesses or corporation, the Constitution follows the Concession Theory, which regards corporate entities as “purely subject to the commands of the sovereign”. This is the reason why corporations may only acquire or hold lands by lease for a “period not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not more than twenty-five years, and not to exceed one thousand hectares in area.”

Following the Concession Theory, the Constitution regards corporations as mere creatures of the State. This Corporatist principle holds that a corporate entity is merely an artificial creature without any existence or legal personality until it has officially obtained the imprimatur of the State according to established law, through the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Section 19 of Batas Pambansa Bilang 68, otherwise known as the Corporation Code of the Philippines, provides for the Commencement of corporate existence, that—“A private corporation formed or organized under this Code commences to have corporate existence and juridical personality and is deemed incorporated from the date the Securities and Exchange Corporation issues a certificate of incorporation under its official seal x x x”.

The Concession Theory is undeniably part of the Fascist or Corporatist doctrine. As Benito Mussolini stated in The Doctrine of Fascism: “We control political forces, we control moral forces we control economic forces, therefore we are a full-blown Corporative state.” This led to the creation of the Ministry of Corporations in Italy in 1926 to achieve balance between (state and public) interests and forces of the economic world”.

Fascist Italy’s Ministry of Corporations, which organized the Italian economy into 22 sectoral corporations created the Charter of Labour in 1927, is comparable with the Philippines’ SEC, Department of Trade and Industry and Department of Labor and Employment combined.

I strongly disagree with the fundamental principle of this Corporatist theory that corporations are mere creatures of the State. The principles of corporate ownership should be based on the individual rights theory. The basis of corporate ownership is the individual’s right to own property, to contract, to sell, to trade, and to associate. The right to corporate ownership is thus an extension of man’s individual rights, particularly property rights. Theorists argue that a corporation’s essential features include corporate personhood, perpetual life, and limited liability, which postulates that a shareholder’s liability is limited only to the amount of his investment. To argue that corporations require the imprimatur or consent of the State is to argue that an individual is also a creature of the State.

3. The Constitution strongly provides Corporatist provisions. One needs to understand that Fascism is Corporatism, and the Philippines has Corporatist laws and policies, which include a plethora of protectionist rules, regulations and labor policies. You might be surprised to know that Fascist Italy was one of the first regimes– a dictatorial regime– that modernized labor laws.

Section 20, Art. 2 (under State policies) of the 1897 Charter provides:

The State recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector, encourages private enterprise, and provides incentives to needed investments.

Section 7 of Fascist Italy’s Charter of Labor states:

Article 9 thus stated that:

“The corporative State considers private initiative, in the field of production, as the most efficient and useful instrument of the Nation.”

Sounds identical? This merely proves that Fascism exists in any form or governmental setup.

Section 9 of Mussolini’s Charter of Labor also states:

“State intervention in economic production may take place only where private initiative is lacking or is insufficient, or when are at stakes the political interest of the State. This intervention may take the form of control, encouragement or direct management.”

On the other hand, Section 7– Statement Objectives– of the Philippine Labor Code provides:

Inasmuch as the old concept of land ownership by a few has spawned valid and legitimate grievances that gave rise to violent conflict and social tension and the redress of such legitimate grievances being one of the fundamental objectives of the New Society, it has become imperative to start reformation with the emancipation of the tiller of the soil from his bondage.

Land ownership by few? But did our Corporatist Constitution and labor laws resolve this social problem of economic dominance by few by establishing a protectionist, regulative economic system that protects our rich few– e.i., the oligarchs and cronies– from foreign competition?

We are indeed a Nation of IGNORAMUSES!

Isn’t ironic that while our economic policies protect the oligarchs and cronies from external competition, showering them with subsidies, special grants, behest loans, political-economic guarantee, etc., our labor laws work to protect the country’s so-called labor sector, guaranteeing laborers’ right to full employment and “equal work opportunities regardless of sex, race or creed”, including their alleged rights to “self-organization, collective bargaining, security of tenure, and just and humane conditions of work”. These philosophical and political contradictions alone show that our very own evil, stupid Constitution conceived by schooled morons encourages or legitimizes class warfare.

Here’s the very flawed logic of those who drafted our Charter: The State gradually destroys the economy through protectionism, massive regulations, failed economic policies, and Big Government agenda, and then commits itself to protect the “socially and economically disadvantaged” against the abuses of the “few” (e.i., the oligarchs and cronies) who undeniably benefit from the State’s political and economic protection. It’s like we’re living in M. Night Shyamalan’s ‘The Village’.

Yes, by means of economic protection, subsidies, grants, behest loans, etc., the State creates the very economic monsters (oligarchs and cronies) against which the poor and the people at large are to be protected. That our country is currently being ruled by both political and economic elites is no coincidence. Whether the country’s elite engineered our protectionist, Corporatist Welfare State  to serve and guarantee their political interests is no longer the question. The people helped build it– and continue to support it– either through their active support or inaction.

This is not a conspiracy theory; this is reality. The reality we live in is our own construction.

Existential signs that we are a Fascist, or becoming a Fascist, state:

• We have a Constitution that strongly emphasizes a very flawed sense of nationalism.
• We have a statist, Corporatist concept of human rights (e.i, alleged “rights” that empower the State to destroy other people’s rights in order to serve the greater good or the common good).
• Immoral, evil use of the military to destroy rights or to serve Statist ends (Note: this could happen in both Fascist and Socialist states).
• State direct or indirect control of the mass media and/or of information. The State could use its political machinery (e.g., the MTRCB, the Videogram Regulatory Board, the Office of the President) to censor information. Or: it could use its power of purse (either through Congress or through the Office of the President that controls PAGCOR and other proprietary agencies) to silence the media or put certain media institutions and personalities under its pay roll. Examples: MTRCB, the Videogram Regulatory Board, Cyberlaw, and others to come.
• Formal or informal identification of enemies. The country’s political fascists consider both the leftists and the pro-capitalists as their enemy. They reject socialism because it could end their Corporatist power. They also loathe Capitalism for its free market principles— individual rights, free market competition or abolition of protectionist rules, LIMITED GOVERNMENT (a government whose powers are purely limited to the protection of rights), economic freedom, objective rule of law, not rule of men.
• Obsession with national security and/or military powers.
• Illegal or extra-constitutional abduction or disappearance of political opponents and critics.
• Filing of obviously trump-up or even manufactured charges by State agents (e.i., the government) against political opponents and critics.
• Protection of industrial and corporate aristocracy (e.i., the economic power of the oligarchs and cronies) through protectionism and regulations that protect the oligarchs and cronies against foreign competition and local businesses.
• Recognition of labor “rights” or privileges according to the State’s economic or labor policies.
• Strict supervision of schools (both private and public) and strong maintenance of public schools and universities. Yes, a Fascist State needs to preserve and finance a State university to spread its political ideals and culture. As John Pollard states in The Fascist Experience in Italy: “In the short term they [cultural and political movements] influenced a whole generation of educated, especially university-educated, Italian youth in a nationalistic direction, predisposing them, as it were, to Fascist ideas and propaganda in the 1920s. In the medium term their ideas were to provide the basis for much of the ideology and policy of Fascism.
• Rampant cronyism, corruption and many other forms of irregularities.”
• Too much regulations and political control of the economy.
• Fraudulent elections.

Some Corporatist provisions of the Constitution include:

Under Article II:

• Section 10. The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national development. — Social justice is an anti-concept. It was conceived by small minds– by anti-conceptual minds. There can be no justice that destroys the very concept or notion of justice. Justice is no class warfare or cannibalistic. As Aristotle once said: “The worst form of equality is to make unequal things equal.” Read related blog here.
  
• Section 13. The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.
• Section 14. The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men.
• Section 15. The State shall protect and promote the right to health of the people and instill health consciousness among them.
• Section 16. The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature.
• Section 17. The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts, culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and development.
• Section 18. The State affirms labor as a primary social economic force. It shall protect the rights of workers and promote their welfare.
• Section 19. The State shall develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos.
• Section 20. The State recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector, encourages private enterprise, and provides incentives to needed investments.
• Section 21. The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and agrarian reform.
• Section 22. The State recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous cultural communities within the framework of national unity and development.
• Section 23. The State shall encourage non-governmental, community-based, or sectoral organizations that promote the welfare of the nation.
• Section 24. The State recognizes the vital role of communication and information in nation-building.
• Section 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.cralaw
• Section 26. The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.
• Section 27. The State shall maintain honesty and integrity in the public service and take positive and effective measures against graft and corruption.
• Section 28. Subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and implements a policy of full public disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.

The entire section of Article 12 on National Economy and Patrimony, particularly the following provisions:

• Section 6. The use of property bears a social function, and all economic agents shall contribute to the common good. Individuals and private groups, including corporations, cooperatives, and similar collective organizations, shall have the right to own, establish, and operate economic enterprises, subject to the duty of the State to promote distributive justice and to intervene when the common good so demands.
• Section 9. The Congress may establish an independent economic and planning agency headed by the President, which shall, after consultations with the appropriate public agencies, various private sectors, and local government units, recommend to Congress, and implement continuing integrated and coordinated programs and policies for national development.
• Section 10. The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic and planning agency, when the national interest dictates, reserve to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, certain areas of investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage the formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly owned by Filipinos. In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified Filipinos. The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments within its national jurisdiction and in accordance with its national goals and priorities.
  
• Section 11. No franchise, certificate, or any other form of authorization for the operation of a public utility shall be granted except to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations organized under the laws of the Philippines, at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens; nor shall such franchise, certificate, or authorization be exclusive in character or for a longer period than fifty years.
• Section 12. The State shall promote the preferential use of Filipino labor, domestic materials and locally produced goods, and adopt measures that help make them competitive.
• Section 13. The State shall pursue a trade policy that serves the general welfare and utilizes all forms and arrangements of exchange on the basis of equality and reciprocity.cralaw
• Section 14. The sustained development of a reservoir of national talents consisting of Filipino scientists, entrepreneurs, professionals, managers, high-level technical manpower and skilled workers and craftsmen in all fields shall be promoted by the State. The State shall encourage appropriate technology and regulate its transfer for the national benefit. The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, save in cases prescribed by law.– LMAO!!! 
• Section 17. In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately-owned public utility or business affected with public interest. — SCARY!!! This is a dormant provision for dictatorship.
  
• Section 18. The State may, in the interest of national welfare or defense, establish and operate vital industries and, upon payment of just compensation, transfer to public ownership utilities and other private enterprises to be operated by the Government.
• Section 19. The State shall regulate or prohibit monopolies when the public interest so requires. No combinations in restraint of trade or unfair competition shall be allowed. — REALLY? The framers were so STUPID, MORONIC to understand that the very system they establish creates monopolies, cartels and cronies.
  

The entire section of Article 13 on Social Justice and Human Rights. First, there is no such thing as a “social justice”. There is only JUSTICE. Second, the Bill or Rights we borrowed from the Americans is enough to protect rights. Also, the term “human rights” was created by neo-liberals, globalists, and welfare socialists. The proper term is “rights”.

The entire sections of Article 14 and 15.

Read your own Constitution. You don’t have to be a lawyer to understand it.

Now, do you want more welfare, state-funded education, healthcare, housing, etc.? You can have all these things under our Corporatist political system. Fascism is the political idea that the government knows what is best for you. It simply means BIG GOVERNMENT– or a government big enough to provide you what you need and desire, yet big enough to take your rights and everything you value in life as well. But if you root for a bigger form of government– the one that is BIGGER than Fascism– you  can have it by joining the socialists. Their form of government is the ultimate, absolute Welfare State!