Would the Philippines be better off if Ferdinand Marcos had not ruined it with corruption?

I've been reading about Ferdinand Marcos and his rule over the Philippines. Here is an interesting quote I recently read:

"Ferdinand Marcos had the intellect, the leadership skills, and the opportunity to be the greatest president of the Philippines in the 20th century. Instead, his impact was ruinous for the economy, the society, and the political institutions of his country. The lost opportunity of economic growth and social prosperity stunted an entire generation and left the Philippines far less competitive than many of its neighbors in Southeast Asia, where economic growth during the same period was spectacular."

My question to you is, would the Philippines be as successful as other Asian countries China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, had they not been so corrupt during the Marcos regime? Or would the country just be the same?

Also, where do you think the Philippines would be if Marcos was never president?

4 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Indeed a tough question. I believe there are several factors that affect a country to be economically and politically efficient. I think that if not for Marcos' greed and megalomaniac endeavors, the Philippines would have been better off than any of her Southeast Asian neighbors. In a random article I've read states that a study has been made and came up with the theory that a president's significant other (a First Lady or First Gentlemen), would also have a great impact on a president's performance which I think is true. Imelda Marcos' extravagant and self-centered attitude could perhaps have slowly metamorphosed Ferdinand Marcos to become one of the world's most corrupt presidents.

    Source(s): Hoy! Filipinos, why not try an unmarried president? Ever thought about that? The priest-turned-politician in Pampanga could be the best the country can ever have as the next president. His integrity can be the country's key to "Tigerhood."
  • 1 decade ago

    In my opinion, if Marcos didn't become our president it still would be the same. It is because we Filipinos are not yet politically mature. We as a people are divided politically and our very own politicians would rather save themselves than serve the people. Well we can't just blame Marcos for the misfortune of our country. Still, we as the citizens should do our part for the well being of our nation. One thing I can say about former presidents, the best one ever is Ramon Magsaysay. Only if he didn't die during his term maybe the philippine political structure might have mature quickly. Its just my opinion and its for you to decide.

  • 1 decade ago

    hard to say.

    however, the one area i can comment on is tax collection. very few filipino/a pay taxes. as such the government does not have the needed income to do the needed.

    the current president, cora m, has has tax reform passed and it will make a difference in the future.

    a big problem in population growth.

    the people are very fruitful and have lots of kids. until they slow down, cash resources will continue to be a problem

  • 1 decade ago

    Gee, that's a tough one.

    I'll get back to you on this one.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.