<div class="image-550">
<img loading="lazy" src="https://cdn.kahimyang.com/resources-9/marcos-duterte-sm.webp" alt="Marcos and Duterte" />
<div>
(Presidents Marcos and Duterte)
</div>
</div>

They would not talk to educate our people to attain a better quality of life. They would not talk about the economy to liberate our people from poverty. They do not even want to talk about ideology because all they do is extol on political rhetoric. But reality would us tell that economics is the substance of politics, and when people are hyperactive in minding their political affairs, it is because they are being disenfranchised from enjoying it. 


Notably, when capitalists prevent the State from doing business, it is an oligarchic system. When the State prevents the oligarchy from doing business, it is called socialism. When the State is allowed to compete with private business, it is "free enterprise" in its truest sense of the word. Hence, when Marcos conceived the idea of a Revolution from the Center, he initiated a democratic revolution by putting economic matter into the political soul instead of just craving for the soul without the matter. There is nothing wrong with it except that the oligarchy and the communists wanted it their own way.

Setting aside the economic sabotage waged by the oligarchy, the US imperialists and their mascots represented by the clerics and of Sison's brand of Maoism, the Marcos program resulted in a balanced economy because he allowed the sharing of progress to all the social classes in society. It was not an orthodox method of imposing absolute equality but one of giving greater opportunity to the less fortunate members of society. Marcos knew, as President Duterte now realizes, that progress will never be appreciated if it is not democratized. 


To make it possible, progress has to be made tangible and accessible to the people. Free education for the students, medicines for the indigent patients and irrigation for our farmers, increased social security benefits for our workers, increased salary for the defenders of the Motherland are just the start in what President Duterte has in store for them, which reason why the disenfranchised masa have been reinvigorated into participating in the political process. 


As Marcos observed during his administration, democracy is more about the economy than about politics. Between equality and inequality, the role of the State is crucial in order to translate democracy to one of economics. It is not about the votes of the people that will give them the opportunity but the State to come out with a mechanism to improve their lives for the better.


Modern economists realize that equality will not bring about democracy as seen by the failure of Marxist socialism because it deprived people of their initiative to advance. To Marcos, opportunity to economically advance is the median between the extremes of inequality and inequality. It is democratic because the choice is still in the individual with the State providing the scaffold to enhance his opportunity. This is what that famous Korean economist, Ha joon Chang, wrote in his book, "The 25 Things They Don't Tell Us about Capitalism."
 

Opportunity has to be redefined in such a way to increase the chances of the people to advance and participate, and that what makes politics meaningful and substantive.


In contrast, socialism tends to simplify things by equalizing the economic structure which is undemocratic because of the element of pressure. Marcos, on the other hand, tried to reach a compromise not by applying the reverse formula of depriving the oligarchy of their wealth but in allowing the State to play a pivotal role in increasing the people's economic opportunities. For instance, instead of taking the orthodox route of nationalizing the oil industry, despite the fact that oil is strategic to our national interest, he advanced the formula of allowing the government participate in business to redefine to the fullest the meaning of free enterprise. 


Marcos saw no contradiction in the formula inasmuch that free enterprise is in essence "free competition". Government entry deterred foreign oil companies from arbitrarily increasing their prices, which effectively served as a natural cartel breaker. Foreign oil companies could not increase their prices because a party that refuses to join the cartel could capture their customers. In that, government competition compelled oil companies to maintain to a minimum level the price of their products. That forced private oil companies to do away all their extra expenses that added to the cost of production.


In politics, democracy is healthy to a given governmental system because issues are decided by the majority. In like manner, the democratization of the economy is good because it helps increase their opportunity to enjoy the fruits of progress. The government, as a competitor, helps keep the cost of production to a very low level. This, in turn, allowed manufacturers to lower their prices. Maybe profit is at a marginal level but it should be seen as part of the economic democratization process. John Maynard Keynes is a believer himself that the market should be regulated to overcome the unwanted cycle in capitalist economies. It was during this period when the US economy prospered.

Duterte's democracy is the democratic revolution envisioned by Marcos