THE OLIGARCHY QUESTION
Erle Frayne D. Argonza
What
should the nation do to the oligarchs? Remember that the constitution and
strengthening of the nation-state, as clearly indicated by historical accounts,
involved the class factor, to wit: the various middle and lower classes forged
a united front to overthrow the trilateral alliance of the
monarch-nobility-priesthood. Nationhood was and will always be a struggle
against predatory oligarchs, as exemplified by the violent overthrow of the
gentry (monarchy, priesthood/Church, nobility) to be able to advance the gains
of the French Revolution. Likewise did the socialist revolutions in various
countries resulted to the strengthening of the nation-state, a strengthening
that was achieved precisely through the institutional decapitation of the
oligarchy, the physical elimination of many of its members and the seizure of
their assets.
In
the Philippine case, the oligarchy is represented by (a) the
landlord-capitalist oligarchs and (b)
the Catholic Church. The landlord-capitalists were the products of the
commercial era of the 19th century up through the industrializing
era of 20th centry, while the oligarchic Church exists as a
carry-over from the feudal Hispanic era. On the one hand, the
landlord-capitalists have begun to preach ‘corporate social responsibility’
coupled with Santa Claus dole-outs handed over to ‘shirtless folks’, many of
whom are shanty residents. On the other hand, the Church has been preaching a
‘preferential option for the poor’ as mandated by the post-Vatican II
doctrines, coupled with ‘basic ecclesial organizing’ among communities aimed at
contributing to ‘social capital’ and empowerment. The question is, do such sets
of actions coming from the oligarchy suffice to redistribute wealth and contribute
to poverty alleviation?
The
maximalist solution is the one offered by Old Nationalism as a response to the
question. The domestic Bolsheviks, whom we count among nationalists in the
Philippine setting, are particularly hot on seizing the assets of the
landlord-capitalists (‘comprador class’ as the Maoists labeled them
collectively) and declaring these under state control. But the same (old)
nationalists are silent about Church wealth, which is so enormous it is clear
that Church oligarchism is a factor contributing to the ailments of our
society. Is it because the Church had contributed immensely to the growth of
the Left, by way of the politicization of many bishops, clergy, religious and
ministers along the Maoist/Marxist way, and by the utilization of Church
convents for such purposes? So now it seems that a Left seizure of power, if
ever, is a surefire guarantee for perpetuating Church oligarchism, while
landlord-capitalist wealth gets seized and declared as state assets, if not as
Communist Party assets.
Neo-nationalism
may very well consider the minimalist solution to the question. Sequestering
assets by the large-scale and jailing/exterminating oligarchs may only be
fruitful in the short-run. But if the value-base of possessive individualism,
greed and predatory practices, including usury and rent-seeking, are not
eradicated, oligarchs will again appear in the future, thus returning us all to
where we were before, as billionaire oligarchs are now appearing by the dozens
in post-Bolshevik Russia.
“If you can’t beat them, join them!” is likewise unsound, as this is tantamount
to capitulation to oligarchism. The minimalist way begins by declaring that
oligarchs, when presented with sound options, can participate in the
development game. With the strengthening of institutions, they will also begin
to exhibit more accountability and responsibility, by first exhibiting
truthfulness in their tax declarations and payments, henceforth fattening the
public purse no end.
The
structural landscape is now changing, and oligarchs are compelled by the
exigencies of the times to recognize the winds of change. Gone were the days
when oligarchs were as powerful as Zeus and His Olympian Entourage who can
never be prosecuted for their crimes, inclusive of crimes of extracting unjust
rent from people’s purses without public consent. As the Meralco case
demonstrates, erring oligarchs do go punished, or at least the erring firm
cannot just engage in criminal acts without being penalized. When civil society
is strong and every kind of public interest group vigilantly watches the
oligarchs’ acts with zeal, the Olympian stance of greedy oligarchs receive
stunning blows by way of court litigations. Meanwhile, oligarchs in localities
who commit heinous crimes, such as that of a former mayor in Southern
Luzon, got jailed for such crimes, something that was unimaginable
in the past. Institutions of justice are now galvanizing, thanks in part to a
vigilant civil society and the synergy concurred by the state with it.
I
would now boldly declare a forecast that in the long run, transcendent values
would permeate the private sphere so greatly, resulting to greater compassion
and the return to simple lifestyles. Eventually, the oligarchs will voluntarily
share an immense portion of their wealth to the people, through stock sharing
schemes, donating large stockholdings to social enterprises, and funding the
equity components or even the working capital of social enterprise ventures.
Other more exemplary acts will be in the offing too, benign acts that are truly
redistributive and not just rhetorical clichés of ‘corporate citizenship’.
Correspondingly,
a more radical organizational culture will crystallize, such that, during times
of crisis, Big Business will no longer have to downsize in order to continue to
gain profits and declare dividends. Rather, the remedial step will be to cut
down on the working hours and temporarily cut down on wages and pay scales, so
that no one gets unemployed in the process. That is because the personnel are
also co-owners of the physical assets. Furthermore, as already suggested
earlier, new accounting systems will arise that will more than highlight human
assets as the most important assets in the agency, thus eradicating notions of
downsizing or expelling people during crisis periods. The ‘corporate citizen’
will therefore become a living organism, unlike today when the concept is
simply a strategy to evade taxes by diverting profits to corporate foundations.
Should
we follow the Bolshevik way, it means that eventually the local Bolsheviks
would become the new oligarchs. The Communist Party becomes the all-powerful
economic Santa Claus owning vast assets, while the branches of government
controlled by the Party, such as the army and parliament, will also respectively
own vast assets, utilized for earning profits that will fatten the purses not
only of the said organizations but of their CEOs’ as well. And when market
reforms will be undertaken as Bolshevik dirigism can no longer be sustained,
new capitalist-landlord oligarchs will emerge, blessed by the all-powerful
partocrats with the mandate to “let a thousand millionaires bloom!” As the
party oligarchy and the new landlord-capitalists enrich their purses,
multitudes will continue to live the lives of paupers, homeless and jobless,
cared by no one other than by howling winds of uncertainties and stray dogs who
keep them company. Surely, this maximalist route is not the most pro-active
route to counterveil against oligarchism, but is in fact a most reactionary
route, the stuff of outdated Victorian-era vampire formulas of sucking rent
from out of the toiling folks.
As
to the Church assets, which will be luckily retained in the advent of a
delusional Bolshevik victory, the key is the Bishopric. Bishops are the
power-wielders of the Church, and are necessarily the biggest obstacles to
change within the Church. “In the long run, we shall all be dead!” declared
Keynes than, and such will be the state of the bishops: the Old
World bishops will be dead soon, as new generation bishops take
their place. Not only are the same Old World bishops—due precisely to their
feudalistic, sexist and Victorian-era prudish (pretending) mindsets—the
stewards of the vast assets of the Church, their ranks are also replete with narratives
of sexual misconduct, corruption and every type of scandalous misconducts from
cryptic figures. Hopefully, the new generation bishops will go beyond mouthing
‘preferential option’ discourses to uplift the poor, and move soon enough to
redistribute the vast Church assets by proclaiming their utilization for
developmental purposes. Such assets can be used to collateralize credit as well
as for loans that should be offered at very low interest rates, thus converting
the Church into a ‘white knight’ at last.
Meanwhile,
the Old Nationalists who are still waving the insurrectionary flag can still
recoup by joining the legal stream, as some entrenched leaders of communist
front organizations are now doing. Their party groups can join political
society, while their mass movements and NGOs will continue to operate as civil
society groups, and become part, hopefully, of those forces that will
popularize to our people the ‘rule of law’ and ‘rule of reason’, in other words
become authentic modernizing forces. Such is a very welcome move by the
insurrectos, and is in fact the forecast pathway for the concerned rebel
forces.
[From: Erle Frayne D.
Argonza, “New Nationalism: Grandeur and Glory at Work!”. August 2004. For the Office of External Affairs –
Political Cabinet Cluster, Office of the President, Malacaňan Palace.]
