Fahim Hasan 10/25/19

9-Emerald Social Studies 9- Major Paper

Does Feudalism still exists?

The idea of feudalism is enormously contested among historians and theorists with some

notable notations exceptions to non-Marxists British historians who have this conception of the

word ‘feudalism’ as formal hierarchy of lords and fiefs and Marxists historians who defined it as

one of the sequences of ‘modes of production’ or forms of society (Comninel, 2012). Feudalism

started and prevailed in Europe during the Middle Ages.

Centuries after the prevalence of Feudalism in Europe we now ask ourselves, does

Feudalism still exists? According to the evidence from journals that I read, it still do. Feudalism

exists in work relations, commerce, and the environment

Nelson (2004) as cited in Macaranas (2009) said that the key characteristics of feudalism

are the following: (1) “a decentralized organization arises when central authority cannot perform

its functions and when it cannot prevent the rise of local powers (2) civil and military powers at

the local level are assumed by landowners or other people of similar wealth and prestige (3) the

local leaders and their retinues begin to form a warrior class distinct from the people of the

territory (4) the distinction between private rights and public authority disappears, and local

control tends to become a personal and even hereditary matter(5) the feudal leaders often take

over responsibility for the economic security of their territories over some activities

(strengthening) their presence at the local level and also make their possessions even more

valuable, and (6) the feudal aristocracies are usually organized on the basis of private

agreements, contracts between individuals.”

 As mentioned in the three characteristics of feudalism paved way to an ununified

government. Any person of wealth and prestige can be the central authority in his land wherein

the government should keep their hands off. This relates to the present day as private land

owners still capitalized from their private properties and the government respects their autonomy

over their land as long as they pay taxes and abide by the law.

Feudalism affected the work relations in the industry. Landlords and peasants relations in

cultivating fief or an estate of land held in feudal service. Landlords will allow the peasants to

cultivate his land in exchange for their services. This landlord-peasant relationship still exists

today but in a different form. Landlords are the people who rent their fields to farmers in

exchange of shares for the agricultural product from their lands.

Feudalism affected the environment as Feudalism’s historical geography was shaped

decisively by the agrarian class relations that enveloped the mass of the population (Moore,

2002). According to Moore (2002), the struggle between landlords and peasants for shares of the

agricultural surplus tended to generate modest (but always constrained rather than ceaseless)

pressures for increased productivity and market production. This good effect of feudalism in the

environment is still existing in the present day society but is not felt in the urban areas like Metro

Manila because of the emergence of industrialization and capitalism.

One of the major issues of feudalism in my opinion was the rich gets richer, and the poor

stays poor mechanism. This is unfair kind of living because the peasant work very hard for a

small share in the agricultural produce while the feudal lords would have most of the shares. The

peasant could not ask for more than what they were given because the feudal lords could increase

the “rent” and the peasants would be left with nothing to eat or feed their family. The landlords
had total control of the lives of their peasants and the children of their children because it was a

cycle that was hard to break for them.

In spite of these issues, feudalism still exists in the country for the farmers rights are still

violated.

Various laws were passed since 1933, for example, the Rice Share Tenancy Act, the first

law to regulate landlord-tenant relationships, providing for a 50-50 sharing contract where the

“tenant’s share was exempted from repayment claims of debt to landlords.” (IBON 1988) But

this took effect only in 1946 when the landlord-dominated municipal councils agreed to its

implementation but its beneficiaries at the end 1986 were only 4.4 percent of the agricultural

workforce (Macaranas, 2009).

In addition, the Department of Labor has confirmed in its 2009 report on the compliance

of the minimum wage among business enterprises, only a little more than 50 percent comply

with the Minimum Wage Law, much less the majority of the labor standards set by the

government. Moreover, 43 percent of the Philippine workforce consist of contractual workers,

according to a study by a labor institute, and their labor rights as set by the ILO “are

systematically violated by their employers, especially the right to a living wage.” (Daenekindt &

Gonzales-Rosero,2003 as cited in Macaranas, 2009).

As mentioned, private land owners still capitalize from their private properties. Even

today we could not do anything because the government respect their autonomy over their land

as long as they pay taxes and abide by the law. Landlords will allow the peasant to cultivate his

land in exchange for their services. To conclude, feudalism was still not unrooted in the

Philippines because of the overwhelming control of the elite and their allies in government.
References:

Macaranas, B. S. (n.d.). Feudal Work Systems and Poverty: The Philippine

Experience. Retrieved from http://www.ilera-

directory.org/15thworldcongress/files/papers/Track_4/Poster/CS2T_2_MACARANAS.pdf

Moore, Jason. (2002). The Crisis of Feudalism. Organization &amp Environment. 15.

296-315. 10.1177/1086026602153008.

Comninel, George. (2012). Feudalism. 10.4337/9781848445376.00027.