Reassessing the CPP's Semi-colonial and Semi-feudal framework in the Philippine context

The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) has long characterized the Philippines as a “semi-colonial and semi-feudal” society, a thesis that informs its revolutionary strategy. This paper critiques that framework using contemporary socio-economic data, arguing that while elements of external dependency and agrarian inequality remain, the Philippine economy is more accurately described as a dependent capitalist formation shaped by neoliberal globalization.

Since its founding in 1968, the CPP has anchored its analysis of Philippine society on the assertion that it is “semi-colonial and semi-feudal.” This view holds that foreign—principally U.S.—imperialism and domestic landlordism are the fundamental obstacles to national and social liberation. Consequently, the Party justifies a protracted people’s war, beginning in the countryside where “feudal contradictions” are considered dominant.

Half a century later, however, structural transformations in the Philippine economy raise important questions about the accuracy and relevance of this framework.

On the “Semi-Colonial” Character

The CPP’s claim that the Philippines is a semi-colony of the United States reflects Cold War-era realities but underplays contemporary multipolar dynamics.

• Diversified Trade Relations:

According to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), China accounted for 21.9% of total trade in 2023, followed by Japan at 13.2% and the U.S. at 11.5%. This distribution indicates that U.S. dominance has waned, with the Philippines now deeply integrated into a wider network of global trade partners.

• Political Autonomy:

The Philippines continues to maintain strong security ties with the U.S., including the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), yet simultaneously engages China, Japan, ASEAN, and multilateral institutions. This balancing reflects constrained autonomy rather than colonial subjugation.

The Philippines remains economically dependent, but describing it as a U.S. “semi-colony” oversimplifies the country’s diversified engagements in a multipolar global order.

On the “Semi-Feudal” Character

The CPP’s insistence that Philippine society remains semi-feudal is challenged by structural shifts in both production and employment.

• Decline of Agriculture in the Economy:

Agriculture’s share of GDP fell from 29.1% in 1970 to 9.6% in 2022 (World Bank; PSA). Services now account for 61.4% and industry for 28.9%.

• Rural Employment Trends:

In 1980, nearly 50% of the labor force was employed in agriculture. By 2022, this had declined to 22% (World Bank). Rural livelihoods are increasingly shaped by informal services, wage labor, and remittances rather than traditional tenancy.

• Agrarian Reform Outcomes:

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) has distributed 4.9 million hectares to 2.8 million beneficiaries as of 2021 (Department of Agrarian Reform). While implementation gaps remain, the persistence of tenancy-based feudalism has been substantially eroded.

Philippine agriculture continues to face inequality and productivity challenges, but the persistence of feudal landlordism as the defining feature of rural society is empirically unsustainable.

The CPP’s framework minimizes the significance of neoliberal capitalist restructuring.

• Labor Export Dependence: Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) remitted $36.1 billion in 2022 (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas), equivalent to roughly 9% of GDP. This reflects a structural reliance on global labor markets rather than feudal tenancy.

• Capital Flows and Integration: Net FDI inflows reached $9.2 billion in 2022 (BSP), with investments concentrated in manufacturing, business process outsourcing (BPOs), and infrastructure.

• Corporate Agribusiness and Land Conversion: Expansion of export-oriented plantations and large-scale mining shows integration into global capitalist circuits, distinct from feudal relations of production.

Philippine society is better characterized as a dependent capitalist economy shaped by global neoliberal integration, rather than by “semi-feudal” stagnation.

Clinging to the semi-feudal/semi-colonial framework risks political miscalculations:

• It privileges a countryside-based insurgency at a time of accelerating urbanization.

• It sidelines the exploitation of wage labor in factories, service sectors, and overseas markets.

• It misdiagnoses the structural enemy, focusing on “landlordism” rather than the broader configuration of oligarchic capitalism and global financial dependency.

The CPP’s semi-feudal and semi-colonial thesis reflected the conditions of the late 1960s and 1970s, when U.S. dominance and agrarian landlordism were indeed central contradictions. However, empirical data now suggest that Philippine society has transitioned toward a dependent capitalist economy deeply embedded in neoliberal globalization.

While inequality, foreign dependency, and rural underdevelopment persist, they manifest through capitalist mechanisms—such as labor export, financial liberalization, and corporate agribusiness—rather than feudal tenancy and colonial control.

A more analytically robust framework would therefore situate the Philippines within the structures of dependent, neoliberal capitalism and oligarchic governance, rather than in the static categories of “semi-feudal” and “semi-colonial” society.

#highlights2025

#highlightsシ゚

#NoToCPPNPANDF

#peace

#peace

#follower