What Socialism?

A considerable number of jubilant electricity-consumers welcomed the sudden intervention of the government, via the GSIS, in the staggering electricity costs in Metro Manila.

GSIS President Winston Garcia was seen as the timely knight-in-shining armor to the multitudes of urban dwellers who were clamoring for emancipation from the overburdening price of electricity in imperial Manila.

For some, owing to the visible hand of President GMA herself in this quest, it was a relief to see that amid the proliferation of political squabbles, and the gloomy economic prospects for the country, the government is still imbued with a noble virtue – that it’s zeal of honest and citizen-centered governance still manifested in its attempt to wrestle power from an affluent economic and political family, even if it translated into an open war against the Lopezes, a formidable opponent even to the government.

Even, there are those who see this exercise as a complete turnaround of government policy, or that it heralds the systematic restructuring of specific entities, as the government now sees the long-needed socialist facelift to private corporations that have, for decades, reigned with impunity, unchecked and all-powerful altogether.

Could socialist persuasion have been the reason for this government encroachment?

According to Amando Doronila, this is not necessarily the case since, he opines, this is merely a blatant use of state fascist power to keep the Lopezes in their toes, and arrogantly impose the unbridled power of GMA and her cohorts over the former.

He moreover notes his observation that the President, poisoned with the prospect of exacting revenge over their family’s long-time nemesis, is poised to play all the cards up her sleeve, even if it means unleashing the standing bureaucracy to achieve this end.

A valid observation, if you were to ask me.

But let us try to stretch his analysis further, and uncover several other myths that this controversy has inevitably spawned for several sectors.

In order for a government to be truly legitimate in owning up to its socialist orientation, there exists an indispensable requisite: it should comprehensively enforce socialism in all significant facets in the course of its governance.

Question therefore, do we see this in the present thrusts and advocacies of the government?

If one were to examine closely the programs of the existing administration, do they indicate that the government has adopted policies which try to veer away from neoliberal practices? Or have they become instrumental in further institutionalizing neoliberalism in the political sensibilities of the nation?

President GMA, a publicly-renowned economist, throughout her tenure, has been generally supportive of globalization-centered agreements – acceding, and quite consistently if I may add, to the hegemonic powers of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the G8 stipulations, and even to the self-serving economic policies of the world’s only superpower, the United States of America.

Even if she deceptively assured the public that these steps successfully ensured that the nation will not be left behind by the benefits of a globalized world order, its real and damning still manifested: the furtherance of marginalization to local industries and the continued proliferation of foreign dominance over our markets and policies, and subsumed under this second effect, is the sustained subjugation of domestic political will to the whims of the hegemonic powers.

The health and education sectors moreover, during her administration, also registered tangible measures for neoliberalist encroachment.

For one, it was during GMA’s administration that the government drafted a health industry program that was geared towards luring foreign and capitalist investments, by means of adopting a medical tourism-centered thrust. With this, the government has virtually forged an alliance with multinational corporations that were to facilitate this unholy alliance of the state and the private sector – even when, in reality, this conceals the unfortunate state of public health services of the government.

More damning, the government’s priorities can be seen at how it appropriates the national budget in the course of its administration of the public funds. I remember writing, when I was still part of the writing pool of the school paper, this staggering reality:

“The crux of appropriating the country’s limited resources is exacerbated by the underhanded misprioritization of government as emphasized by its huge allocations to its debt servicing commitments, and its unreasonable appropriation [to/for] the country’s national defense capabilities. Combined, both sectors take up 117.5 billion of the 1.053 trillion budget for 2006, whereas the health sector is compensated with mere scraps of 11.7 billion. This would mean that while the government spends heavily on these less important sectors, its budget for the 76 million Filipinos is barely 8 pesos per person.”

GMA’s administration also holds the worst record in ensuring free and competent public education nationwide, for it was in her tenure that schools were unregulated in systematically raising tuition fees, and other similar financially-restrictive measures to economically-unprivileged students. It was during her tenure for example, to concretize this point, that the premier and most prestigious state university in the country, the University of the Philippines, raised its tuition cost by more than 300%, owing to budget cuts – even compelling school administrators to form skewed partnerships with MNCs such as call center establishments (the Western world’s most effective tool for intruding into the thriving cultures of vulnerable states), just to augment the deficits that it incurred.

What then, one is tempted to ask, is in store for Isko and Iska?

These obvious strains of neoliberalist bias also holds true to most of the sectors in society as dictated and guided by government policy and intuition.

Where then, does the justification for treading a socialist path get into the picture?

Clearly, there is no comprehensive program for reconstructing the ideological alignment of the government as a whole; what we merely have is a selective government policy which isolates certain entities with the rhetoric of socialist claims, whereas other equally-important sectors are left to decide for themselves, undeterred in their ventures, even when they further embolden the economic and social cleavages that further polarize the nation.

Let us now try, in attempting to relate this ruckus with the learnings in class, to localize the problem, and contextualize the claims of the government (as regards this intervention) vis-à-vis its more believable motivations.

Gloria says the nation needs to be emancipated from spiraling electricity costs, subsuming the rhetoric of individual freedom with this claim. At last, we will be free. At last, liberty is within reach – and at last, the government has done its part in ensuring that democracy will prevail.

A sound contention at first glance, but upon closer inspection, does this really embody the naked truth?

If there was one person who needed freedom before the GSIS issue erupted, it would be no other than the President herself, with her administration (before the brouhaha), wracked by successive corruption exposés, bureaucratic ineptitude not yet seen in decades, indignant calls for her resignation from all sectors imaginable, and a legitimacy that was widely questioned and to a certain extent, challenged.

By rallying the people behind a seemingly worthwhile cause, which is their eventual freedom from the shackles of monopolistic and dehumanizing exploitation from money-hunger private corporations, she sought a transformation of her image: from being a wretched despot into the personification of everything noble and virtuous, from being the oppressor of the masses into becoming their sole source of comfort, because she sympathizes, she feels their agony.

Her formidable record in public deception has served her well, for after the GSIS controversy, the nation momentarily forgot about Jun Lozada and his personal crusade, and either voiced support for, or spitefully condemned, Winston Garcia. Compounded with the penchant of Filipinos for easily forgetting the wrongdoings of their leaders, this translated into GMA’s momentary freedom from the courts of public opinion, and her adeptly-orchestrated emancipation from the watchful gaze of a vigilant public.

Another observable feature of a genuinely-functioning socialist order is the empowerment of nationalized industries.

If, lets theorize, GMA became successful in her quest for converting Meralco into a public entity, would this have translated into lower electricity costs? Or a better-streamlined corporation perhaps which would shun corporate gluttony?

To an observable extent, this one-time government interference runs ironically against the generally-adopted capitalist alignment that the government has espoused through the series of privatization efforts that it spearheaded in crucial public establishments such the Philippine National Oil Company (PNOC), and the National Power Corporation (NPC).

And if, hypothetically again, Meralco becomes public in nature, would this have assured the consumers that electricity costs will be kept at bay? Given the horrendous record of bureaucratic performance in nationalized corporations, and the widespread perception of ineptitude and incompetence of the same, would this have been, in retrospect (let’s assume), a worthwhile and sustainable project?

Although initially, the recently-converted public company (assuming, again) will lower electricity costs in order to appease the disgruntled public and rationalize its swift and sudden takeover of Meralco, what will happen when the long-established bureaucratic ineptitude will gradually seep in and it becomes susceptible to politicking? What is foreseeable when a political appointee is at its helm, chosen for convenience by the President herself?

I can only cringe at the possibility of undemocratic encroachments within these democratically-constructed entities, because the rhetoric of freedom becomes, in an instant, fleeting, and we are left with a deceptive government, an ailing and heavily-indebted public firm, and an apathetic public which sustains this vicious and atrocious cycle.

And what about socialist ideals?

‘What about them?’

La Gloria asks the question herself, with a sinister smile painted on her face, as the rushes to the airport to board a plane which will take her to the next WTO Summit, with the steady resolve of reaffirming the Philippine commitment to these farce and emasculating concepts of global interconnectedness and international solidarity.

There, with her, goes your socialism.