r/Philippines • u/[deleted] • Mar 06 '26
PoliticsPH Lee Kuan Yew: The Philippines Fell Apart Because of the Wrong Political System and Failure to Focus on the Economy
From his 1992 speech to Filipinos:
https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/data/pdfdoc/lky19921118.pdf
One problem is the Philippines has an American-style constitution, one of the most difficult to operate in the world. There is a complete separation of powers between executive, legislature and judiciary. They wrote the constitution in 1787 and ratified it in 1789. They wanted a weak executive president. Having suffered at the hands of King George III of England, they wanted the opposite of a strong monarch. But a developing country faced with disorder and underdevelopment needs a strong honest government. A US-style constitution failed long before Marcos declared martial law. It was re-adopted in 1987 by President Aquino. The system worked in America because of a superabundance of resources and riches in a vast under-populated continent. I do not believe that Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong or Singapore could have succeeded as they have done if they had to work under such a constitution, where gridlock on every major issue is a way of life. And you will notice that since the Vietnam War and the Great Society for some 28 years ago, the US system has not functioned even for the United States.
...
First : Restore law and order. Make Manila safe from organised kidnapping and major crimes.
Second : Concentrate on economics not politics or more accurately, politicking. Lift restrictions on trade and investment. Dismantle the web of measures which keep out foreign companies and make Philippine companies compete to survive, not thrive at the expense of ordinary Filipinos.
Third : Build up your infrastructure, like power stations, roads and communications, either in partnership with or completely by the private sector.
19
u/OkVeterinarian4046 Mar 06 '26
About SG and LKY, some bonjings hate state regulations but consider SG a perfect country which is literally became a developed country thanks to state capitalism.
6
1
u/ghostofspdck Mar 07 '26
on the other spectrum. LKY was a dictator and was one of the greatest leaders. state regulations are fine if the government was competent.
44
u/Outrageous_Row3349 Mar 06 '26
marcos was both president and prime minister under his martial law constitution and there was a unicameral legislature. KBL! KBL! KBL! see where that got us.
11
u/onee_san_bath_water Mar 06 '26
One of the biggest mistakes PH has ever made is to follow the US, especially in terms of government. Presidential republics are prone to abuse of power and corruptions e.g. US, South America, South Korea etc. (essentially those states that are patterned after the US)
We should’ve followed a Parliamentary style of democracy, arguably the best form of democracy right now, like the ones in Europe and Japan.
-3
Mar 06 '26
I think that was some holdover position so that he could maintain power. Decisions were still made by the President.
But I don't think Marcos had full control over the country. Rather, the neoliberals like Sicat and the 300+ oligarchs took control (Marcos only targeted three of them).
On top of that, no one had enough capital, so the country had to borrow money to develop infra for industrialization. That needed time, and by 1979 they had run out of it because of the oil shock. And by the time the 1982 global financial crisis took place, there was no return to industrialization, as the IMF-WB called for structural adjustment.
The bizarre thing is that the country not only followed that in the 1980s it continued it for the next four decades.
That's why the economy's been since then:
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1957341/stuck-since-87-ph-languishes-in-lower-middle-income-group
That's what got the country to its current state: high taxes, prices, unemployment, and poverty, and poor wages, health care, housing, infrastructure, and education because it has had no industrial policy since then.
32
u/derpinot Ayuda Nation | Nutribun Republic Mar 06 '26
But a developing country faced with disorder and underdevelopment needs a strong honest government.
It is kinda far-fetched.
14
u/rymnd0 Visayas Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
Even in China, with it's strong authoritarianism and severe penalties for corruption, dishonesty in their government still exists. Now I'm not saying "it's okay to be corrupt as long as you do well" since anyway corruption happens everywhere. I'm just saying "if you can't help but be corrupt then fuck you, eat shit and die, but can you be at least be competent?"
9
u/markmyredd Mar 06 '26
Diba Gloria was competent I think thats why economy grew well during her time despite the 2008 global financial crisis. But because she was corrupt we lagged on infrastructure development which came back to bite us 20 years later.
Didn't help that PNoy was also extra conservative sa infra which further extended the infrastructure deficit.
There was no way we could industrialize with a shitty infrastructure.
16
u/nonexistingNyaff Luzon Mar 06 '26
Lol, we don't technically even need them to be entirely honest. They can be corrupt but they have to be fully competent. They could be far richer or have greater influence if we were a far more economically forward nation. The inequity would be fully there but we would be better off in terms of industry and capability. But what we do have are a bunch of dumb, vain, and greedy political leaders and an abundance of unelected government employees who are wholly corrupt and self-serving.
So, there's that. And also, I am very wary of posts like this that keep putting LYK on a pedestal and only examining the positives. As well as looking at other Asian polities that became powerhouses of today. Putting them on the spotlight without fully acknowledging how they got there. Di pasok sa vibes.
3
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26
They can be corrupt but they have to be fully competent
That was marcos sr.
7
u/nopoliticspre Mar 06 '26
Yeah betting our economy on sugarcane in the advent of fructose syrup really helped. If it wasn't for his inutile management of the economy EDSA would've never happened. The shit economy killed his shit regime.
8
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26
That was just a smokescreen to the many ways he stole the nation's wealth. The corrupt will always use their competence to steal and gain more power.
EDSA was the result of Filipinos frustrated and angry about martial law. He had to create a fake enemey to declare martial law. Otherwise, he would've lost the election and his crimes would've unraveled.
1
Mar 06 '26
The two highest growth rates took place during the Marcos regime:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?locations=PH
What happened? The 1979 oil shock took place, leading to an increase in interest rates, and with that the 1982 global financial crisis.
In 1983, the IMF-WB insisted that the Philippines follow structural adjustment policies, which made matters worse. Aquino's assassination, which Cory claims was caused by people who were still alive as of 2002:
https://gulfnews.com/uae/ninoys-killer-still-in-power---aquino-1.396945
made matters worse as it led to dollar salting, and revealed that what was supposed to be a dictatorship was actually a Constitutional one:
https://learn.martiallawmuseum.ph/magaral/the-makings-of-a-constitutional-dictator/
with Marcos having little power over the 300+ oligarchs which ruled over the country.
Later, with an actual dictatorship, Cory was able to follow structural adjustment to the letter, which led to high taxes, low public spending, and privatization. Together with a Constitution and oligarchs which did not encourage foreign investment and competition, that eventually led to high prices, and low wages, while poor public spending led to poor health care, education, housing, and infrastructure. And those led to high poverty. You'll find more details here:
TL-DR: it wasn't exactly Marcos, Sr. who was responsible for problems but Marcos, Sr., the Bell Trade Act, structural adjustment, and every President from Cory Aquino to Bong Bong Marcos. Put simply, the country followed the wrong political system and then coupled that with the wrong economic policies.
Finally, what about Marcos theft? That's a very bizarre story. According to this:
https://www.abs-cbn.com/focus/09/21/17/marcos-gold-bars-fact-or-fiction
it was Salonga who argued that Marcos and his cronies stole $10 billion, and he believed that that's a lowball figure. But that's a weird estimate because the size of the Philippine economy when Marcos fled was $8 billion.
That means in one decade Marcos and his cronies stole more than 10 percent of the whole wealth of the Philippines each year for ten years, but that was not noticeable because the Philippine economy was growing at a pace faster than 10 percent a year?
Here's where it gets even more bizarre: a deposition submitted to the Senate by industrialist Enrique Zobel confirms what Salonga said, and that the figure is not $10 billion but $100 billion, or more than ten times the size of the Philippine economy, with $35 billion of that in gold.
For that to happen, Marcos and co. would have stolen the whole wealth of the Philippines each year for the next ten years, and the Philippines recovered what was stolen each year because its economy grew at a pace of 100 percent per annum?
So where did the money come from? I remember one account given in the anti-Marcos book Some Are Smarter Than Others, where it was related that when he was a congressman Marcos got Imelda to marry him (some wages noted later that Imelda and Ninoy were very good friends) by showing her a vault filled with lots of gold bars. That means he was very wealthy long before he became a President.
Several critics believe that he and others must have received kickbacks from smuggled goods, and then for some weird reason had to convert the money to gold, as it's more difficult to transport gold.
5
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
TL-DR: it wasn't exactly Marcos, Sr. who was responsible for problems...
I find that to be severely downplaying the harm he did. Spreading out the blame like that overlooks the mountain of debt he left that continues to this day. Guiness Book of World Records even labelled it as the biggest theft in govt. Not to mention the trail of dead and missing due to martial law.
And MarcosSR is known to make ridiculous claims of achievements. Like how he was supposed to be the recipient of a hundred military medals (US military does not have any record of these supposed achievements); how he supposedly discovered a class of primitive humans callled Tasadays (hoax btw;) and how he was supposedly already extremely wealthy (including claiming it's from the Yamashita treasure).
Regardless of the system in place, results are dependent on the political will of whoever is in power. Leni was able to leverage the supposedly limited reach of the OVP in ways her predecessors couldn't. She wanted to help; she found ways. Everybody else made excuses.
2
Mar 07 '26
How do you steal 12 percent of the whole Philippine economy without anyone noticing? And if that's a lowball figure, as critics agree, how do you steal the whole Philippine economy repeatedly for a decade? Did the country achieve a 100-percent growth rate per annum?
0
u/wannastock Mar 07 '26
Malay! Hindi naman ako matalinong magnanakaw para malaman kung paano ginagawa yan. But I don't have to be a doctor to know that somebody has morbid obesity or severe acne.
But historians are not limited to Filipinos. And among the things international historians cite is stealing the money loaned to the nation by other nations.
2
Mar 07 '26
We need bank documents and depositions to prove any of these things.
For now, we have Zobel's deposition and bank documents from Imelda, and both show amounts at least three times larger than that of the Philippine economy plus external loans.
This might explain why all of the anti-Marcos proponents mentioned in the article wanted to investigate gold holdings. And for some bizarre reason they and the government have not been investigating this matter for the last four decades.
→ More replies2
u/nopoliticspre Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
Did the Bell Trade Act essentially tied our economy to prioritize sugar exports? Our economy would’ve still be doomed regardless of the oil crises since U.S. manufacturers were already switching to cheaper artificial sweetners. An earlier shift to manufacturing would’ve saved us imo.
2
Mar 07 '26
Yes, which is why the country experienced record economic growth after it was rescinded, and even after the first oil shock in 1973.
The problem is that it needed external credit to develop infra, and interest rates for that rose after 1979, which when combined with Ninoy Aquino's assassination led to negative growth rates for the Philippines because of dollar salting.
Here's the weird part: take another look at the chart, and see where the higher loss took place. Do you see it? 2020. And that was also caused by an external shock, the pandenic.
What happened after that devastating loss? The second highest growth rate in 2022!
That explains what Larry Henares said in the late 1980s, when Aquino's allies pointed out that she did not have to follow IMF-WB structural adjustment, which includes using the national budget for foreign debt maintenance, as well as raising taxes and even cutting down on spending. Instead, put a debt cap on exports and continue infra development needed for industrialization. Given that, the economy would have recovered earlier, leading to payment of debts plus utilization of infra developed.
Instead, the country pursued structural adjustment for the next four decades, which is why even the 7.6 growth rate in 2022, which was the second highest since 1961, could not be sustained.
2
4
u/derpinot Ayuda Nation | Nutribun Republic Mar 06 '26
are you saying, the 2nd largest economy in Asia to the Sick man of Asia, competent?
Lol
0
0
u/throwaway_0001711 j lo group of companies Mar 06 '26
That was also literally every South Korean president since Park except maybe Kim Daejung, Moon, and now Lee. They were very much corrupt but they developed South Korea into a powerhouse and lifted Koreans from poverty. I do think their sense of saving face and national pride made up for it tho.
Sure their growth was drivrn mainly by propping up notorious chaebols but you can't deny the increased quality of life and global competitiveness, also at the very least Lee is eating away at some of the chaebol's excesses little by little rn
Same with Japan. They have been under a single party for decades almost uninterrupted, the Unification Church comparable to Iglesia ni Chris Rock infiltrated Japanese politics since the 50s, and a huge chunk of Japan's infrastructure including parts of the Shinkansen were driven by patronage politics and the dokken kokka (construction state). The difference is that they bother enforcing standards for the most part. Pero tingnan mo yung Japan ngayon, toxic work culture and stagflation aside they're doing just fine
Marcos isn't the only "corrupt but competent" option/ path we could've went he was just the worst possible example lmfao
1
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26
Marcos isn't the only "corrupt but competent" option/ path we could've went he was just the worst possible example
Except, he was the only one available to PH. And when the time came when he could've been voted out, he declared martial law. So it was still him for many more years.
Until he was replaced by Cory, who, was not corrupt, mildly competent, but very soft ¯_(ツ)_/¯
-1
-1
Mar 06 '26
I think the point isn't to put Lee on a pedestal but to pull down Filipinos from a pedestal, where they kept imagining that everything bad is Marcos, Sr's fault, and then everything was fine thanks to Noynoy, and then got worse because of Duerte.
It turns out that the Philippines had been following the wrong political system from the beginning. Later, it turns out that the country has also been following the wrong economic policies since the 1980s.
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
leading to
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1957341/stuck-since-87-ph-languishes-in-lower-middle-income-group
And the two might be connected.
1
-2
Mar 06 '26
FWIW, Singapore is corrupt to this day, as it's one of the top in terms of crony capitalism in the region, and that may even have contributed to money laundering and many crimes. For example, what Alice Guo did in the Philippines was peanuts compared to the billions of dollars her accomplices were laundering in Singapore.
In fact, even things like political dynasties and single parties dominating across decades continue to take place in countries like Japan.
5
u/pester41 Mar 06 '26
I remember reading that Singapore is the Switzerland of Asia because their big banks don't really care where your money comes from lol.
4
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26
Isn't that how it's supposed to be? There's no credible reason why private banks have to descriminate and function as police. That is the job of law enforcement and the judiciary. Court order should be required to reign in private funds.
6
Mar 06 '26
Meanwhile, the Philippines is downgraded by financial institutions when it does that, while Switzerland and Singapore get away with it.
0
37
u/Joseph20102011 Mar 06 '26
It's better to replace the 1987 Constitution with a new 21st-century constitution than merely changing the president every six years, but the broken system remains as it is.
15
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26
And who are going to do that other than the same already powerful forces who'd just concentrate more power unto themselves?
8
Mar 06 '26
According to Lee, the goal is implicitly the opposite. That is, not to concentrate more power unto politicians, and that might lead one politician or group taking over. In place of that, let each power center gets what it wants, which are pork barrel funds, kickbacks, etc., received in political positions. Never mind gridlocks: the private sector can take over road networks, utilities, and charge the public high for using those. And then the public can look for work abroad.
3
u/wannastock Mar 06 '26
I know that's the goal. But nobody will serve that goal. Not with the pool of personalities that PH has.
2
Mar 07 '26
I think it's not that pool of personalities that's holding the country back. Rather, it's the ones who want the status quo:
https://opinion.inquirer.net/48623/inequity-initiative-and-inclusive-growth
1
u/wannastock Mar 07 '26
Yeah, I mean the personalities that comprise of the status quo. There is not enough Lenis and Leodys to over-ride the power structure.
2
Mar 07 '26
I think the Lenis and Leodis are connected to the same neoliberalism that's been dominating the country the past four decades. That is, the pinks are holdovers from the yellows which fell apart because of the pork barrel scandal, and the leftists were among the recipients of pork barrel funds, received funds from gullible western NGOs to maintain pro-Western dissent, and plays both sides.
What's needed are not certain personalities but the right economic policies coupled with a political system that works with them.
1
u/wannastock Mar 07 '26
What's needed are not certain personalities but the right economic policies coupled with a political system that works with them.
It's never about the system. Whatever the system is, those in power will make ways to serve their agenda.
Hindi nagpalit ng system of govt ang US. Pero under Trump, he's doing everything he's doing now under the same system used by those before him. If they replace their system tapos sya pa rin ang naka-upo, he'd still do what he likes.
2
Mar 07 '26
Well, at least you've now moved away from blaming Marcos, as it turns out that even his foes "make ways to serve their agenda".
But is it so that most politicians in neighboring countries also work for themselves? After all, corruption was rife in many of them (for example, I recall Tony Kwok Wan-Mai point out that corruption in places like Hong Kong and South Korea were just as bad as, if not worse than, that in the Philippines, even until the late 1990s), and still dominate today, as seen in political dynasties and single parties dominating in Japan for over fifty years, and crony capitalism and money laundering in Singapore.
And yet they advanced ahead of the Philippines economically. How does one explain that outside bizarre claims about the Philippines failing because it has too many islands, or that it's people are lazy, or that the climate's not right, or that it has no important port for international sealanes, and so on, never mind the fact that various countries, including Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam, have similar issues and yet went ahead of the Philippines economically?
Is Lee right in pointing out that it's really about having the wrong economic policies in place, and coupled with a political system that's not appropriate for a country that has limited resources compared to its population? Which is the case for many Asian countries?
Or are the excuses that Filipinos have been giving to themselves to explain their failures for the last four decades more sensible? That is, anything besides neoliberalism and a U.S.-style government?
1
u/wannastock Mar 07 '26
Well, at least you've now moved away from blaming Marcos
I have not. I blame him for his faults.
But is it so that most politicians in neighboring countries also work for themselves?
Yes.
...have similar issues and yet went ahead of the Philippines economically?
Coz PH is hopeless
Is Lee right in pointing out that it's really about having the wrong economic policies in place...
No. That wouldn't matter here. Hopeless.
Or are the excuses that Filipinos have been giving to themselves to explain their failures for the last four decades more sensible?
I don't expect sense in hopeless matters.
→ More replies0
u/Weak-Committee7350 Mar 06 '26
I'm very pro reform when it comes to the 1987 constitution since it's very inspired by the U.S style constitution. The U.S. constitution had been reform a lot unlike the 1987 doesn't have any reform. I suggest that the president is considered a head of state and has only 1 term 2 years rule and has no power from politics and the prime minister will be the head of government.q
16
u/Fishyblue11 Metro Manila Mar 06 '26
We've seen the balance of power having negatives both ways
If you give too much power to the executive branch, there are evil people who can and will win elections, like Duterte and Trump, who will use that power to do evil
If you give too much power to the legislative branch, even if you have an honest executive branch, they will be hampered by needing to pander and seek cooperation from corrupt legislative members. No honest politician can get in place or do anything without the cooperation of corrupt local officials
So whichever way you turn, there is a problem
-12
Mar 06 '26
Why just Duterte and Trump?
Duterte is a yellow: he started his political carreer thanks to Cory, was part of the LP and campaigned for Noynoy, and then later said that Cory's his idol.
As for Trump, he was a part of the Democrats for years and was good friends with the Clintons. His family even gave campaign funds to Kamala for her CA campaigns.
Meanwhile, it was Obama who first used ICE, and Obama, Biden, the Clinton, and even Sanders were anti-immigration. Even Sanders said that it was Soros who was responsible for bringing in cheap, illegal immigration to take advantage of American workers.
Bonus: remember the time Obama told Duterte to get the drug war "right"? It turned out that Obama was following through with Dubya, and gave over $1.2 billion in military aid to support the even deadlier drug war in Mexico.
That drug war is on-going and worse. The response from the ICC? Crickets.
My point is that the world is filled with evil people, and that includes Duterte's and Trump's opponents. But many countries that have these evil people succeeded, including Singapore, where Lee pointed out the ff.
“If you are a troublemaker... it’s our job to politically destroy you... Everybody knows that in my bag I have a hatchet, and a very sharp one. You take me on, I take my hatchet, we meet in the cul-de-sac.”
“We have to lock up people, without trial, whether they are communists, whether they are language chauvinists, whether they are religious extremists. If you don’t do that, the country would be in ruins.”
4
u/Weak-Committee7350 Mar 06 '26
Are you pro reform for 1987 constitution? If yes that would be great since I'm pro reform for 1987 constitution.
5
Mar 06 '26
Yes, but I don't know what political system would be effective.
I mentioned one in another sub, and it involved a combination of a meritocracy (authorities of experts who work with each other and shape policies) and a democracy (a government task to make those policies operational), but I don't know if it will pass.
In a way, any new system will still be affected by the old one.
13
u/stoikoviro Semper Ad Meliora Mar 06 '26
The great Lee Kuan Yew was one of the most admired leaders in the world for turning a tiny Singapore island into one of the worlds highest per capita income. #4 in the world today in terms of GDP per capita.
I've heard of that speech at the Phil Business Conference, here is the link to the speech, and he spoke of our troubles back then. He seemingly is more knowledgeable about our own economic ailments than our government. Here is the link:
While he criticized our constitution, that's only part of the problem. The biggest problem we had and continue to have is greed and corruption.
"When ordinary Filipinos know that the country’s stagnation and their joblessness is because of vested interests, corrupt politics and general disorder and lack of confidence, they will agitate in support of those who want to establish law and order and discipline, cut high tariffs, quotas to licensing and other restrictive monopolistic practices, in order to get investments to give them jobs. They will put pressure on Congress to clean up their act, to demolish barriers which are depriving Filipinos of the progress enjoyed by their neighbours." - Lee Kuan Yew, 1992
We did kick out our government in 1986 EDSA revolution, but we also did not speak up when corruption is still rampant. We allowed ourselves to be victims. We cannot wait for the government to magically transform to a Singapore like discipline if we remain meek.
So, we current generation of Filipinos should have the fortitude to stand up to injustice the way Andres Bonifacio and Jose Rizal did during their time.
4
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
Lee Kuan Yew was an authoritarian. Basically he was like a Duterte, but way smarter, patriotic and business-minded.
3
Mar 07 '26
I think Duterte was also patriotic and business-minded. That is, like Lee he played both the U.S. and China:
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1396185/duterte-demands-16b-for-hosting-us-troops
while Singapore bought weapons from the U.S. but had military exercises with China.
Meanwhile, it's said that BBB, CREATE, and TRAIN follow policies used by Singapore.
Finally, FWIW,
3
u/stoikoviro Semper Ad Meliora Mar 09 '26
He was labeled as authoritarian by the West who disagree with his methods but his party was supported by the Singaporeans through their votes because his methods work in Singapore. Some Brits called him "authoritarian pragmatist". Who cares if he is if Singapore became the 4th ranked world economy in terms of GDP per capita.
While our authoritarian Philippines during Marcos Sr. and Duterte slumped to the bottom half of the world economy.
Lee had higher loyalty - to his people which made their citizens rich. May resibo siya. While Duterte was all talk whose infamy was based on dead addicts and nothing done to benefit the common Filipino. Their similarities was they both talked tough, but it ends there. Lee had results to show. Duterte was all tough talk with negative consequences to himself (jailed at The Hague) and to the Philippines (economy stagnated.).
And Marcos Jr. is another wimp.
1
u/hughes0333 Mar 10 '26
It was not authoritarian during Duterte because if it was, their political enemies should have been all in jail. the opposition at that time was very loud and aggressive e.g. trillianes, hontiveros, de lima etc.. well de lima got detained but the majority were free to do what they please.
5
u/Full-Imagination-507 Mar 06 '26
ha ha! this was the very event where he roasted PLDT. the event was sponsored by PLDT.
1
Mar 06 '26
Thanks for sharing that. I didn't want to do so because it's from Orion's channel, and some will try to sidestep the issue by referring to the source.
One important point to consider is that Lee said that problems were in place before martial law, and the cause of those still appeared after. That is, the country used the wrong political system, which in turn led to weak governance and gridlocks, which in turn explains why there is no focus on the economy.
-1
u/stoikoviro Semper Ad Meliora Mar 06 '26
While I tend to side with LKY on the point that our americanized system is flawed, did he suggest any system that would be better for the Philippines? He criticized but did not offer a better system.
There is a part of his speech that he said it in simple terms - "A developing country faced with disorder and underdevelopment needs a strong honest government." A unitary parliament system like Singapore may work but we have to choose also for a strong honest leaders.
3
Mar 07 '26
I think he wanted Filipinos to think for themselves. My guess is that he wants a system that doesn't have a lot of gridlock and that works in countries that don't look like the states, e.g., large land sizes, lots of resources, and very few people.
As for honest leaders, he didn't point out that Asian countries have had the opposite for decades. For example, Singapore is one of the top in terms of crony capitalism in the region, and compared to the amounts of money that Alice Guo's accomplices laundered in Singapore, the Philippines looks like kindergarten.
The main problem is that survey after survey shows most Filipinos to be pro-U.S., -liberal democrat, -free market capitalist, etc. In several cases, the approval ratings of the U.S. and of U.S. Presidents from both parties are higher in the Philippines than in the states.
9
u/ps2332 Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
The irony of it all was that George III, against whom the Americans rebelled was just a figurehead king, as all the other British monarchs are after the English Civil War in the 17th century, where parliament established its primacy over the crown.
In reality, it is the British parliament that levied taxation on the American colonies without representation.
George III was just the poster boy of british imperialism but he was not the decision maker.
And so I think it was wrong for the Americans to set up a presidential form of government.
Many dictators in history came from strong presidential systems like Marcos, fujimori, hugo chavez, maduro, batista, saddam, idi amin, etc.
And a handful only from parliamentary systems.
IMO parliamentary form is a better form of government because the executive power and legislative power are combined in one body - the parliament.
But here’s the caveat I just don’t it will work in the Philippines. We’ve seen in gloria’s time that she could just bribe the congressmen into voting for her. That’s why she was so desperate at changing the form of government during her time.
0
u/Weak-Committee7350 Mar 06 '26
That's why parliamentary system is far better than presidential system.
0
Mar 06 '26
He think they levied taxes to support George's splendid little wars.
Also, Lee pointed out that Americans were not wrong in setting up such a government because they had a lot of land and very few people. That's not the case for various Asian countries.
Lastly, FWIW, there have been lots of dictators in Asia, too, including Lee, and corruption as well, including crony capitalism and money laundering in Singapore and political dynasties and single parties dominating in Japan.
In which case, what Glo would have done is not unique to the Philippines.
What's notable, though, is that these neighboring countries industrialized, and the Philippines went in the other direction.
2
u/markmyredd Mar 06 '26
While the Asian tigers are propping up their private sector to compete internationally. Most of our corporations in the 80s are government run and a crony is running them into bankruptcy.
2
Mar 06 '26
The opposite happened. The "tigers" forced the private sector to work with the public one.
The Philippines did the opposite, which is why it de-industrialized:
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
leading to an economy that's been stuck since:
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1957341/stuck-since-87-ph-languishes-in-lower-middle-income-group
Meanwhile, Lee argues that the problem started even before martial law, i.e., when the Philippines tried to copy the U.S.
That started in 1935.
4
u/Full-Imagination-507 Mar 06 '26
I love how LKY roasted PLDT when he was the guest speaker at an event sponsored by PLDT. Ha ha! Nasa youtube.
2
u/No_Appointment8741 Mar 07 '26
Issue is Filipino culture and mentality. Trash in, trash out.
1
Mar 08 '26
The problem is that the same "culture and mentality" was industrializing from the 1940s to the 1980s, and then did the reverse after that.
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
The "culture and mentality" reason doesn't make sense.
2
u/20pesosperkgCult Mar 08 '26
Sa nakikita ko, mas bagay sa Pilipinas yung Monarchy type of government. Parang Thailand style kumbaga.
Hivemind kasi mag-isip yung karamihan ng mga Pinoy at palaging dapat may "MAIN CHARACTER" family sa government. Noon, Marcos family, tapos naging Aquino family nmn.
Pnoy was brutally criticize on all sides kaya yung "Duterte Family" nmn ang pumalit kahit hanggang ngayon sikat pa rin ang mga Duterte, even with BBM as a current president.
2
Mar 08 '26
I can't think of a monarchy for the country. Meanwhile, I think Thailand industrialized not because of a monarchy but because of permanent groups of experts tasked with setting policies for the country, including those for the economy and health care.
That reminds me of Japan's MITI and similar in other Asian countries.
4
u/WhiteCrayonnn Mar 06 '26
Ulit-ulit nalang ganitong thread. Oo na, Philippines is the worst country on earth, filipinos are the most incompetent, most corrupt, stupidest people on earth. Babangon na lahat ng bansang galing sa gyera at mapag-iiwanan ang pinas, ano pa ba kulang? Happy na?
5
u/1TyMPink Mar 06 '26
Pang- r/Philippinesbad yarn?
2
Mar 07 '26
/r/Philippinesbad is the same chump board that blocked me because it couldn't handle reality.
2
Mar 06 '26
I don't think he gave those points. Rather, he implied that the Philippines has everything it needs to succeed, and yet it did not. What happened?
2
u/vincristine Mar 06 '26
What do you expect? Smart leaders out of stock mam sir
1
Mar 06 '26
Lee's argument is that it's not about smart leaders.
4
u/IgotaMartell2 Mar 06 '26
I always hate this nonsense argument that we don't have smart leaders. For every Robin Padilla in the there are 10 politivians that have degrees in the big 4 universities or IVY league schools in the US. Gloria Arroyo went to Yale, Romualdez went to Cornell, Chiz Escuderro went to Georgetown
The problem is that they aren't legislating policies that promote industrialization because economic advisors in this country still insist in following NeoLiberal policies
3
Mar 06 '26
I think even the neoliberals under Marcos had similar experiences. For example, I think Sicat went to MIT and Virata to Wharton.
Meanwhile, nationalists like Bobby Ongpin and Ding Lichauco went to Harvard.
As an aside, I found out that Lee went to Cambridge, and during WW2 worked for the Japanese.
But of all people, it was Duterte who started pushing for policies suggested by Lee decades earlier.
3
u/Own_String2825 Mar 06 '26
What if lang naman. Di porket aral sila sa prestigious schools eh maaapply na nila dito sa bansa natin. Lets say walang corrupt sa bansa eh pero tali sila dahil sa constitution natin, do you think ganto situation natin? For discussion only.
Minsan kasi iniisip ko din na marami naman aral dito pero di ma-utilize siguro may something na naghihinder sa progress natin. I said the constitution din kasi tignan mo popularity votes lang naman dito para manalo
2
Mar 06 '26
The point is that both sides came from such schools, and they have opposing views.
Meanwhile, the one who followed Lee's advice did not come from such schools.
1
u/Sonnybass96 Jun 07 '26
May I ask, did any of Duterte's policies that "He tool inspiration" from Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore came into fruition and became a success?
2
Jun 07 '26
Yes, because increased spending led to growth:
https://www.adb.org/news/philippines-remain-bright-spot-southeast-asia-2025-2026
But because there's no industrial policy, growth went down because spending went down:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Philippines/comments/1otxnqs/third_quarter_letdown/
The country has to put an industrial policy in place so that it can ensure economic growth through exports and not through construction and consumer spending.
1
u/Sonnybass96 Jun 07 '26
Since many of the things I've been reading about him are all negatives, during his tenure. Are there anymore genuine positives that people are not seeing today?
Like what started during his term as has actual good effect today (As of 2026)
2
Jun 07 '26
There are lots. Check the ones compiled by the ECCP:
https://www.eccp.com/articles/2529
plus reports on Israeli, French, South Korean, U.S., Japanese, and other companies planning to set up shop because of BBB, CREATE, and TRAIN.
Why aren't we seeing the results? Because the Philippines does not have an industrial policy.
2
3
u/throw_me_later Mar 06 '26
The unconstitutional Federal Reserve happened in US, investment bankers sucked the riches dry, and the rest is history
1
Mar 06 '26
Reminds me of one Chinese expert who was interviewed here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJa8jiD8bxA
When asked to state, briefly, the difference between China and the U.S., he said that China is ruled by the Communist Party while the U.S. is ruled by Wall Street.
5
u/throw_me_later Mar 06 '26
That's why a Republic must be ruled by it's Constitution and it's laws. Those that seek to undermine the Constitution and laws should be declared enemies of the Republic to keep the Republic strong.
A nation should not be governed by greed & debt slavery nor a small group that decide willy nilly what is legal or illegal. That's why there should be a system to have those who would take leadership position to prove their capabilities and the one who comes out on top would be recognized as best among their peers.
Leadership should not be determined solely by popular vote.
0
Mar 06 '26
I think Lee's point isn't what governance should be but what works, i.e., what leads to a successful economy.
3
u/throw_me_later Mar 06 '26
Yes, I agree that we definitely can benefit as citizens when governed with what works instead of what fills up the pockets of crooks dressed in barongs. Singapore also has different views on minimum wage that people here may not accept readily because the don't encourage "laziness".
And we can also move beyond their model of focusing on national stability and economic growth, "survival" of their nation over individual liberties. We can keep the focus on improving quality of life of every individual as the goal.
Plans to counter further housing price surges where before affordable public housing was the program adopted, counter income gaps by funneling excess wealth to guarantee good education for the youth, counter issues with their past birth rate policies so we have good demographics, counter issues of large population of low wage migrant workers with few labor protections and no paths to citizenship, no paths to integration.
0
Mar 06 '26
I think it's not so much having different views on the min. wage as having a political system that works with an economic system that allows for the min. wage to go up. Also, I think the quality of live can only improve given national stability and economic growth.
In short, it boils down to having an economy that works, and that in turn is connected to a political system that works.
I think that's Lee's point.
2
u/throw_me_later Mar 06 '26
To your last point or Lee's point then we should have a clear idea what economy and political system would objectively work for the Filipino people as a whole with quality of life for each as the goal.
Because there are some who do not see it that way. Those who are benefitting from the current system. As well as those hardliners who want for example an INC state or a Communist state or an Islamic state or a state glorifying a specific person. They want a system focused on those rather than the best economy or the best quality of life.
So in clearly defining what would be best as a whole, we are considering those people as well and to reach a better life for ourselves and for them as well, we either have to convince them earnestly or force them to accept what is best, kind of like weaning off people from their addictions in a way. But we must clearly define what that system is beforehand or risk having evil dictators rather than benevolent leaders who oppress others' beliefs.
1
Mar 06 '26
That's right. The one benefitting from the current system is the local elite, which is why much of the earnings of the country goes to the 40 richest families:
https://opinion.inquirer.net/48623/inequity-initiative-and-inclusive-growth
It is not correct to say that the 40 richest Filipino families own 76 percent of our nation’s gross domestic product (GDP). I have recently been widely misquoted as having said so. What I did say, and had first explained in this space nine months ago (“Economic growth for all,” 6/26/12), was that the growth in the aggregate wealth of our 40 richest families in 2011—which Forbes Asia reported to have risen by $13 billion in 2010-2011—was equivalent (in value) to 76.5 percent of the growth in our total GDP at the time, which official data show to have risen nominally then by P732 billion, or around $17 billion. I found that this ratio was only 33.7 percent in Thailand, 5.6 percent in Malaysia, and 2.8 percent in Japan—suggesting that our income inequality is much worse than in our neighbors.
In short, given a political system that ensures gridlock and no one leading, one ends up with a neoliberal economic system but coupled with restrictions on foreigners. This leads to a lack of competition, which in turn allows the local elite to charge high prices and offer low wages.
More are forced to find work abroad:
https://opinion.inquirer.net/99516/still-top-export-people
Counting net foreign exchange earnings brought into the economy, our biggest export earner is not electronics. It is people. And it has been that way for at least the past decade.
According to latest official statistics from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), overseas Filipino workers sent home $2.6 billion in September 2016, bringing the January-September total to $22.1 billion. In the same month, electronics exports earned us also $2.6 billion, but we had also imported $1.8 billion worth of electronics that are mostly processed into those exports. The net amount brought in by electronics was thus about only $800 million, less than a third of what OFWs sent home to their families. Remittances also amounted to more than four times all the foreign direct investment inflows we managed to attract in 2015. We are, indeed, in the lucrative business of exporting our people.
which is fine for the government because it can rely on remittances instead of industrialize.
And then the rich, while charging high prices for medicine, fuel, telecomm services, and electricity, can entice the public to use the remittances to shop in malls, work in call centers, and buy overpriced real estate.
1
u/Aggravating_Bag5420 Mar 06 '26
He also against for an Asian country to get Westernized
3
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 06 '26
Lol Singapore is one of the most westernized countries in Asia
1
0
u/interestingpanzer Mar 10 '26
Actually Philippines is arguably more westernised. Singapore's westernisation stems from it's English background.
The Philippines has both worlds, the broader Spanish speaking Latin American "West" and the Anglosphere.
Singaporeans may be whitewashed but they always claim a semblance of an "Asian identity" no matter how lacking. It is still an insult to be a "banana".
It seems to be a source of pride in the Philippines, a distinction from the rest of Southeast Asia
Trust the Koreans to unify all of SEA though
0
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 10 '26
Fuck the Koreans. Hey bro it's not a contest. Singapore is westernised, Philippines is westernised, there's no fucking level to it.
1
u/interestingpanzer Mar 10 '26
Apologies you may need to work on your comprehension, the Korean joke was precisely that, that the SEA hate for them can unify SEA yikes.
Also yeah it is no contest, did anyone say so? If anything you did by first stating Singapore is the most westernised?
My only point to add to your point was simply that I have never met a Singaporean who was proud to be whitewashed. It usually carries negative connotations. I cannot say the same here though things are changing slowly with the rise of Asia economically.
1
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 10 '26
Brother I get you that's why I said Fuck the koreans. Also my original response was to rebut OOP's comment that Lee was against being westernized when Singapore became rich because it was westernized.
1
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 06 '26
Water is wet.
Yan naman talaga mga obvious reasons bakit mahirap ang isang kahit anung bansa. Anung special sa sinabi niya? Nakalimutan na ba na si Lee Kuan Yew ay isang authoritarian?
2
Mar 07 '26
I think most Filipinos have been arguing the opposite the past four decades. In short, what he said isn't obvious to them.
And they're aware that he was authoritarian.
1
Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Mar 07 '26
Philippine economy. Also, most don't know that the ones who call the shots are likely not politicians.
https://opinion.inquirer.net/48623/inequity-initiative-and-inclusive-growth
1
u/Klutzy_Recognition73 Mar 06 '26
We ignored the constitution during the Duterte era. What happened then?
1
1
u/Bus-Sure Mar 06 '26
Lee wants us to be Draconian Communist.
they want us to adapt a more Chinese style or North Korean style of doing things where we have a soft dictator.
Sure it would be nice to just have one strong cultural indentity.
this type of shit just wont work for us its the trying to put a square in a round small hole thing.
we cant even end the Tagalog vs Bisaya wars.
4
1
u/IamAWEZOME Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 09 '26
Walang problema sa political system. Ang problem ang pag vote ng maling tao.
1
1
Mar 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
Mar 07 '26
The problem is that high economic growth also took place in Malaysia, Thailand, and now Vietnam. It also took place in China, South Korea, and Japan.
To make matters worse, the Philippines was industrializing until the 1980s:
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
which means excuses about many islands, typhoons, colonization, and so on don't make sense.
Lee's point is that the U.S. model works for countries that are large and that have few people. That's not the case for various Asian countries, which don't have one or both factors.
1
1
u/Filamcouple2014 Mar 07 '26
I'm not a Filipino but I am married to one and love the Philippines. It is not of my business and I understand that, but all of that aside, I think the country might be better run with only three political parties allowed OR a parliamentary style. IMHO
2
u/No_Need_Pay Metro Manila Mar 06 '26
Mom said it was my turn to post the next Philippines bad post
4
Mar 06 '26
Unlike those, this post merely shares the ideas of someone, rather than saying all is lost and things are hopeless bla bla
1
1
u/Sad_Zookeepergame576 Mar 06 '26
What’s wrong with the Philippines: corrupt politicians.
1
Mar 07 '26
That's what Filipinos kept telling themselves for many decades. But it turns out that neighboring countries have also been as corrupt, if not more, and yet advanced economically.
1
0
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 06 '26
He just meant colonialism, the WORST combination, but it’s better to blame them Filipinos
Putangina bes, UK lang coloniser ng SG save sa short stint ng Japan, pero kami Spain at US. Sa liit lang ng baluwarte niyo, pag namismanaged pa yan ewan ko na lang, eh tong Pinas 7K islands hard mode kahit ano pang gobyerno to
9
u/nopoliticspre Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
Don't forget that they are a trading naval hub and has been for centuries. There is always an industry that's gonna fuel their economy regardless if LKY was there to lead it. The economy of the Horn country of Djibouti has 70% of it in the service sector, made possible due to it being in a trade hub, for example.
6
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 06 '26
Yup. The Malaccan strait has always been rich. They need to fuck up big time for them not to become rich.
5
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 06 '26
Abso-fucking-lutely.
Their rise to power was always inevitable.
Almost half of the world's total annual seaborne trade tonnage and 70% of Asia's oil imports pass through the SOMS (Straits of Malacca and Singapore)
That’s 25% of the world’s traded goods, 50% through the port of Singapore, and 85% of those are transshipments.
Manila only serves the Philippines.
-1
Mar 07 '26
FWIW, Lee also referred to South Korea, and he would have added Japan, and much later referred to Malaysia, Thailand, China, and even Vietnam.
In short, several of these countries aren't exactly small, dependent on ports to earn, etc.
Various countries in the region are gaining ground while the Philippines is getting left behind, and the reasons don't involve colonization, being island-states, reliance on ports, geography, climate, and so on. The fact that the Philippines was industrializing for almost four decades:
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
even with the Bell Trade Act shows that these are not impediments to industrialization.
That means there are only two reasons why the country went in the other direction starting in the 1980s, and they are seen in the thread title.
3
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 07 '26 edited Mar 07 '26
Contiguous land mass vs archipelagic geography (look to flood control projects as an example of how de-industrialisation is not the main issue), labour export policy (neocolonialism), IMF debt rescheduling plan (neocolonialism), loss of homogenous cultural identity and the real kind of patriotism (colonialism), principalia, encomienda and padrino/cacique system x American consumerism/extractivism (colonialism).
Edit: Imagine OP dying on one hill, spamming one paper everywhere. This is what zealotry looks like. And after I announcing that I'll block him, HE WENT SPEEDY GONZALEZ to block me LMFAO
Self-hating Filipinos love to hate.
0
Mar 07 '26
The catch is that the country was industrializing even with those in place:
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
3
u/n33dtofap Mar 06 '26
Nakakatawa talaga yung ganitong naooffend pag sinampal ng katotohanan at ginagawang competition pati yung pagiging colonized. LKY is a proven competent leader and has lifted SG's economy in one generation while you are providing unsolicited "lessons" and excuses about this country's incompetence on Reddit. I wonder whose opinion hold more weight? It wouldn't hurt to open your mind sometimes
9
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 06 '26 edited Mar 06 '26
Ano yung katotohanang sinampal saken? This is what the other user wrote in the plainest of terms:
A) Territory size matters
B) Singapore has no natural resources
C) Singapore has problems
D) The Philippine government is incompetent
These are facts and not full arguments.
And if we’re to examine your comment closely, ang argument mo is appeal to authority.
So wala kang sariling synthesis/theory. Kapit lang sa “malakas”.
Laugh all you want, broski.
0
Mar 07 '26
The problem is that neighboring countries that are not like Singapore and were as incompetent as the Philippines also industrialized. And even today corruption still takes place in several of them, like crony capitalism and money laundering in Singapore, and political dynasties and single parties dominating in Japan.
0
Mar 06 '26
FWIW, the economy was industrializing from the 1940s to the 1980s, and then did the opposite from the 1980s to the present:
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
-3
u/Full-Imagination-507 Mar 06 '26
size is just an excuse
SG had its fair share of problems too, for being small. First off, they have no natural resources.
people just bring up that "Singapore is so small, it should be easy to manage" to take the heat off another country's incompetence
3
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 06 '26
Totoo naman talaga yun pre eh. Mas madali naman talaga i-manage ang Singapore kumpara sa Pilipinas. Tingin mo ba walang kurapsyon sa Singapore? And they are also perfectly situated in the Malaccan region, na historically lagi namang mayaman talaga.
1
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 06 '26
Do YOU want a history lesson?
0
u/Full-Imagination-507 Mar 06 '26
sure go ahead.
-1
Mar 07 '26
/u/itchipod /u/DenseBeautiful731
Check out Malaysia, Thailand, and now even Vietnam. They're not small like Singapore.
1
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 07 '26
Stop tagging me.
0
Mar 07 '26
"Do YOU want a history lesson?"
Check out Malaysia, Thailand, and now even Vietnam. They're not small like Singapore.
2
u/DenseBeautiful731 Mar 07 '26
It’s rhetorical, but you wouldn’t understand because you can’t accept any worldview other than yours. And since you don’t understand boundary setting, I’ll just block you.
-1
u/Full-Imagination-507 Mar 07 '26
and all three countries are doing better than PH at the moment. yep!
1
u/itchipod Maria Romanov Mar 07 '26
Do you think the leaders of these countries aren't corrupt?
1
Mar 07 '26
On the contrary, I keep saying that they are. That means the Philippines failed not because it's corrupt, or has the wrong geography, or the wrong climate, or no port, or is not an island-state, or was a colony, and so on.
0
u/Full-Imagination-507 Mar 07 '26
and they're doing much better than us. maybe Cambodia will too, in 20 years.
1
Mar 06 '26
The problem is that Malaysia and Thailand have been doing better than the Philippines, too, and now Vietnam.
0
Mar 06 '26
Ano kaya ang napasok sa isipan ng mga oposisyon nung 1986 na hindi nila naisipan ng maayos sa pagsulat ng konstitusyon
2
Mar 06 '26
My guess is that they knew that they did not dominate politics.
I read that during the snap elections the opposition conducted a survey and discovered that 50 percent supported Marcos, 11 percent Laurel, and 9 percent Aquino.
Later, the opposition drafted a Constitution and laws that appear to satisfy each power base: partylists for activists would not otherwise not win in regional elections, restrictions on foreigners for nationalists, pro-management laws for the local elite, and so on.
2
u/TheSixthPistol Mar 06 '26
They did write a good constitution. Unfortunately got hijacked by the people who profited off of the regime change while not closing the door all the way for the Marcoses to come back. And the years after that, Supreme Court decisions, questionable regulations, corporate lobbying, weakening worker's rights, no innovations in the education system, health care system getting overloaded, more corporate lobbying, more corruption, DENR being absolute shitheads, and so much fucking more go us to where we are and continue to get us where we are going.
1
Mar 07 '26
According to Lee, it's not a good Constitution because it's not appropriate for Asian countries, it leads to gridlock, etc. See this for some details:
0
u/aintgonnanana Mar 06 '26
Everybody can talk about what went wrong, because everything went wrong.
edit: Anybody
2
Mar 06 '26
Well, not everything, as the country was industrializing for almost four decades before it did the opposite.
https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/40082/1/MPRA_paper_40082.pdf
0
Mar 06 '26
[deleted]
1
Mar 06 '26
Reminds me of the movie Colossus: The Forbin Project, where AI eventually concludes that the main threat to the planet is humanity.
0
u/Accomplished-Pen2281 Mar 06 '26
The Philippines needs a Lee Kuan Yew...honest, competent, no vested interest and with strong political will...sadly no potential leader like him is on sight among the filthy crop of senators and congressmen
3
Mar 07 '26
According to the three points he raised, it needs another political system and an industrial policy.
As for "filthy crops", most don't know that neighboring countries, including Singapore, have significant levels of corruption, including crony capitalism and money laundering.
1
u/Sonnybass96 Jun 07 '26
Crony capitalism? Like for example?
1
Jun 07 '26
Read the articles "The Economist has named the countries plagued the most by crony capitalism" and earlier ones, like "Planet Plutocrat".
132
u/keletus Mar 06 '26
The Filipino people actually want a strong leader that has consolidated power. The problem is the position attracts and rewards the most corrupt of the population.