Business groups, predicting the election of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in the May 2022 presidential race, are anxiously wondering what kind of president he might be, especially on economic issues. Could he be like Marcos Sr. who, from the start, sought not only to restructure the Philippine economy but also to intervene directly in the markets? Would he favor certain economic actors and would he attack others whom he perceives as contrary to the interest of the nation and the common good?

Unlike candidate Marcos Jr., who did not bother to spell out his economic agenda, Marcos Sr. had ambitious economic plans that he sought to accomplish in an unstable global economic environment. He was not hostile to foreign capital; in fact, it sought to encourage more investment from abroad. But he also talked about developing a Filipino industrial class that wouldn’t just be a junior partner or a dummy for foreign interests. His role model was South Korea under Park Chung-hee. To achieve this, he argued that massive government support was needed to support Filipino entrepreneurs: loans on demand, import privileges, tax exemptions, sovereign guarantees, etc.

The businessmen he showered with these favors became Marcos’ “buddies”. Unlike the Korean “chaebols” that Park nurtured into the gigantic successful conglomerates of today, Marcos’ cronies lacked accountability; they were not penalized when they abused the state aid given to them. As the documents will show later, they reciprocated the favors Marcos bestowed on them by making him co-owner of their businesses.

These state-sponsored businessmen indeed became very wealthy. In addition to naming them, the late researcher Ricardo Manapat listed their companies in his groundbreaking work “Some Are Smarter Than Others.” They were supposed to be the antithesis of the traditional rich Marcos called enemies of progress, but they were actually worse.

Marcos wasted no time in pursuing rich old men like the Lopez family, whom he identified as the owners of big media, utilities, mining concessions and vast tracts of land. He accuses them of joining forces with the Communists to sow disorder. In his speech announcing martial law in 1972, he justified his assumption of emergency powers as the state’s legitimate response to a “left-right conspiracy” to overthrow the duly established government.

The confiscation of their properties, which Marcos said was the product of their immense political clout in successive administrations, formed the populist element of Marcos’ authoritarian agenda. He threatened them with imprisonment if they resisted, thus forcing them to flee abroad.

If all of this sounds familiar, it’s because, decades later, Rodrigo Duterte would use the same model, echoing the same populist theme of defending the public interest against “greedy oligarchs” who used their political influence considerable to multiply their wealth under the post. -Edsa governments. Like Marcos, he publicly denounced these “oligarchs” even as he created his own cronies, threatening to imprison them if they did not agree to give up the benefits they had obtained under previous administrations.

I put the term “oligarch” in quotation marks to indicate its changing meanings in light of more recent usage. Think of “the Russian oligarch” – a phrase that explicitly refers to a race of overnight billionaires who emerged in the 1990s, especially in Russia and Ukraine, from the economic chaos that followed the dissolution of the Soviet Union. These were young upstarts, who capitalized on their relationships with former USSR officials to acquire state assets and reap huge profits from arbitrage. Corruption of public officials is still an integral part of their way of doing business.

The system in which the Russian oligarchs thrive has more in common with “cronyism” under Marcos than with capitalism as we understand it. Always aware of their vulnerability to political interference, they have been known to park most of their wealth abroad, rather than reinvesting it in Russia.

This is not to say that the old business groups in our own country are above using political connections to get the best possible deals for their businesses. Indeed, I know of no time in the history of our nation when the special proximity to political power has not been taken advantage of by the propertied class – even if only to protect them from the extortionists who tackle business, or to facilitate obtaining regulatory approvals. Rare is the successful businessman in our country who could afford to be outside of politics and not make even a token contribution to a strong candidate for political office.

The difference between Russian-type oligarchs and cronies and legitimate entrepreneurs lies, I suppose, in the ability of a business, regardless of origin, to continue operating without preferential treatment from those charged with to promulgate collectively binding decisions . This is what autonomy means from the vagaries of politics.

While it’s hard to say what Marcos Jr.’s economic agenda is, one thing is certain. Judging by his family’s longstanding assertion that much of Marcos’ estate is made up of stock in corporations owned by former friends, a Marcos presidency will not hesitate to use the powers of the office. to expedite the recovery of properties that the family believe belong to them.

I argue that’s why Marcos Jr. wants the presidency so badly.

[email protected]

Read more

Don’t miss the latest news and information.

For comments, complaints or inquiries, contact us.