If The 1987 Constitution Is The "Best In The World" Then Why Hasn't The Philippines Massively Recovered From The Ill-Effects Of The Marcos Years?

Happy 35th anniversary to EDSA today, right? It's very easy to get stuck in the hype that EDSA Revolution toppled the Marcos Years which were obviously NOT the golden years. It's very easy to talk about the human rights abuses of the Marcos Years such as the arrest of political opponents, ABiaS-CBN being SHUT DOWN FOR REAL (unlike today's loss of franchise), and seized from the Lopezes, and the crony capitalism. Yet, what's most often forgotten is that the Marcos Years was characterized by RAMPANT economic protectionism which also allowed more room for human rights abuses. The Marcos Years sank the Philippines into much debt not just because the Marcoses stole money from the Philippine treasury or misused taxes -- it was also because they protected the oligarchs from foreign competitors via economic protectionism. Whoever says that the Philippines is "blessed" by protectionism may want to go have a vacation in the Kingdom of North Korea or in Venezuela. After EDSA was accomplished in 1986 -- the 1987 Constitution was built to replace the 1973 Constitution. Later, Hilarious Davide called it "the best constitution in the world" but is it really? If it were so then why hasn't the Philippines even recovered from the ill-effects of the Marcos Years? 

The big common answer of the adherents that the 1987 Constitution is "the best in the world" for its failure to help the Philippines recover is because Marcos' ill-gotten wealth is yet to be recovered. Please, the whole problem of waiting for Marcos' ill-gotten wealth to be recovered is just like Juan Tamad waiting for the guava to fall into his mouth. It's really the same old narrative of "What if Marcos never rose into power." It's an obsession that's holding Filipinos back, wasting decades of opportunity for progress, and only whining about what if Marcos never rose to power. Again, I'm NOT saying that JC Punongbayad of Rappler is wrong to raise that issue. The big issue if Punongbayad would rather focus on continuing economic protectionist policies. It's because protectionism is also what allowed Marcos' rampant corruption and cronyism to go unchecked. A study of history will tell us that Germany was far worse after the end of Nazi Germany and that China was far worse after the death of Mao Zedong. Yet, these countries who were left battered worse than the Marcos Years recovered. Thinking of using Marcos as an excuse? It would also be a serious contradiction when you think that they claim that 1987 Constitution is the best in the world yet its adherents think that it's because of the Marcos Years. If it were the best in the world then it should've helped Filipinos have a massive economic recovery after the downfall of Marcos.

Are they still claiming that shifting to parliamentary systems is bad and that the Marcos Years were a parliament? Please, neighboring countries or other countries they admire for "delicadeza" are PARLIAMENTARY COUNTRIES. It's crazy to keep saying that the parliamentary system will drive the Philippines poor while making a flip-flop by admiring how Shinzo Abe of Japan resigned, Singapore has a good response, or how New Zealand has a better woman of a leader. For their information, even Ninoy Aquino revealed that the Marcos Years were under a mock parliamentary. Ninoy rightfully called it a parliamentary without a parliament while discussing how the British type actually works. A mock parliamentary is not a real parliament like how mock meat isn't made of animal meat but vegetable proteins like gluten and soy protein. In short, a mock parliamentary isn't a real parliamentary. Yet, they still continue the same narrative while hypocritically admiring the late Lee Kuan Yew and Mahathir Mohamad, both PRIME MINISTERS. The Philippines should've gone full parliamentary last 1987 because the late Corazon C. Aquino was more fit for the role of a ceremonial president while Fidel V. Ramos was fitter to be the actual Head of Government. Cory should've been assigned to diplomatic duties such as being the Head of State to visit Lee in Singapore. Ramos was better at handling national affairs as the Prime Minister of the Philippines while having a formal Opposition. 

What do you think allowed other countries which aren't parliamentary to recover from the slump? China may still be unitary-presidential and a COMMUNIST country but it recovered after Mao's brutal regime by receiving foreign direct investments (FDI). Deng Xiaoping announced to the world that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was open for business in the world market and it did. Deng turned the CCP from a loser communist organization into a big shot communist organization that the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) can dream of. Vietnam even if it identifies itself as a communist state accepts FDIs allowing it to recover faster than the Philippines. The Philippines should've gotten rid of the so-called Filipino First Policy. It's possible to be "Filipino First Policy" while accepting FDI. For example, investors are allowed to invest in the Philippines without a Filipino partner while they're held by the local business environment rules. For example, FDIs can operate without a Filipino partner while they're obligated to pay legal fees such as taxes, business permits, and the monthly rental from Filipino real estate owners. Again, do I need to keep saying that FDIs are not invaders of Filipino sovereignty? FDIs are like tenants to their host countries. FDIs do business in foreign lands BUT they're still obligated to follow rules. It's like how tenants are required to follow rules in the space they're renting. Their profits are still TAXABLE, they're still obliged to hire locals wherever they go, and that they would most likely want to use local resources as much as possible so they can produce at a lower rate. Failure to do so will result in eviction.  

It's really time to stop deluding ourselves about the 1987 Constitution. If anything, the 1987 Constitution has always been OPEN FOR AMENDMENTS. Yes, Davide is wrong about it not having to have certain aspects of it changed because his favorite constitution is OPEN FOR CHANGE. That's why Ramos wanted to do badly needed constitutional reform. Besides, try telling neighboring Asian countries that the Philippines is the best in the world -- they will just LAUGH YOU OFF!