Cecilio Arillo’s Greed and Betrayal was one
of the seminal works that attempt to expose the first Aquino government as a
corrupt regime bent on revenge and self-enrichment. His method in the book was
merely dropping of facts, following his training as a journalist. Later on, I
heard he had released a new book to follow up his work.
A Country Imperiled looks at the bigger
picture (it is a bigger book than Greed and Betrayal) of the history of the
Marcos downfall and Aquino administration – and the subsequent deterioration of
the country. Its subtitle “Tragic lessons of a Distorted History,” reveals its
main thesis: that Marcos was a dictator is a distortion of history and his
successor should instead have the title.
The book starts with a recounting of world history
and how economics shaped the world. Arillo makes the argument that mercantilism
led to the rise of industrialized nations which became today’s world powers,
and that neoclassicism led to the recent financial crisis and the poverty of
the Philippines. He also makes the assertion that industrialization, and not
agricultural development, leads to growth in a country.
Arillo next describes Ninoy and Cory Aquino
in his own words. Ninoy is cast as a warlord, a typical trapo, who was
responsible for the Hacienda Rodriguez robbery and failed to live up to expectations
of him as a promising politician by supporting his wife’s family’s agenda. Cory
Aquino is cast as a protector of her family interests, and is willing to be so
at the expense of the country.
The book then makes an interesting
comparison between Marcos Era economics and today’s economics. Arillo says
under Marcos’ protectionist and largely government-driven policies, the
Philippines’ thrived. He shuns cronyism as another false accusation, saying
that what really brought the country down was economic sabotage from without,
engineered by American elements. He also uses the local power industry as a
demonstration of his explanations (Especially with what’s happening in
Mindanao!).
Arillo believes Marcos was the hero of his
time and was more victim than villain. Arillo downplays the human rights violations
angle on Marcos, saying that Aquino has a lot more human rights violations. He
also says the human rights violations during Marcos’ time were wrongly
attributed to the president. Marcos was scapegoated by the oligarchs with the
help of... you guessed it... mass media. This makes a striking parallel with what
is happening under the second Aquino admin.
Based on Arillo’s account, Marcos’ efforts
to de-power the oligarchs were part of an honest attempt to improve the country.
The oligarchs were angry at Marcos for this, since it meant their greed would
be checked. Thus, they conspired with some American help to have him removed,
using the story that they were “oppressed.”
Arillo also holds to the belief that US
backing, and not “People Power,” was largely responsible for the success of the
1986 EDSA Revolution. He provides accounts of the involvement of US politicians
George Shultz and Stephen Solarz from behind the scenes. He claims the Light A
Fire Movement was an actual terrorist group and was responsible for the
bombings during those days. International media also conspired to run
propaganda stories against Marcos. I should say, perhaps the most obvious proof
of American involvement was Marcos’ being spirited away to Hawaii aboard American
aircraft.
About the writer, Arillo himself admits he
was a suspect in the 1989 coup d’etat. He gives no statement on whether the
charges are true or not. But I could understand it if he took part, given the
frustration one would have after realizing the state of the nation.
Perhaps today, many people share this
frustration with the second Aquino administration. Arillo says history has been
shrouded in historical distortion. EDSA 1986 was not the toppling of a
dictator. It was nothing more than a power grab helped by a foreign power, and
it was not a revolution, but a restoration of old inequalities that Marcos
tried to solve.
I will admit the impact of this book on me
is profound. Arillo blames the poverty of the Philippines partly on the agenda
of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, which is dominated by
neo-classicists. Others have said this and I had long been skeptical of it. But
after seeing Arillo’s explanation, I can now understand why some people reject
economic liberalization and 100% foreign ownership of businesses. I was also
once skeptical of the American role in the removal of the Marcoses; now I find
it more convincing given Arillo’s accounts. Arillo says Marcos was not an American ally; rather, Marcos opposed the policies
of the IMF-WB, which favors American interests, and he paid for it. Another thing
is that I can more appreciate Renato Constantino after earlier branding him as
a leftist, as he is oft-quoted by Arillo on the Marcos aftermath.
The real surprise to me in this book was
Arillo seemingly adhering to the beliefs of nationalist economist Alejandro
Lichauco, who espouses protectionism and rejects economic liberalization. This
came as a sort of blow to someone who supports economic liberalization as I do.
But then I saw that he wanted the Philippines to become a highly industrialized
country, which sits well with me.
Lichauco also sees problems with the Constitution.
He agrees that Article XII is problematic, but more because of its
self-contradictory nature. Of note is Sec. 1, par. 2 which says the country
should industrialize, but must do so through an agriculture program. This is
contradictory since raising crops does not create factories. On foreign
investors, Arillo says the Foreign Investment acts of 1991, which allows 100%
foreign ownership of certain businesses, is an Aquino legacy, contrary to what
some people including myself believe.
Arillo also slams the Catholic leaders in
the Philippines, saying that they support the oligarchs since they own stocks
under some of these oligarchs’ companies. This is said to be the main reason
the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines supported the Aquinos. Arillo also finds it strange that while the
Vatican rejects the policies of free trade, the CBCP does not. In addition, Arillo
says the Vatican ordered the CBCP to stop meddling in politics, but the CBCP
refuses to obey. Arillo also calls the Catholic Church the "world's oldest surviving transnational corporation."
While one may shake their heads in
disbelief after reading it, much of the information seems reliable. Some
stories are not new, such as the IMF-WB thrusts and the disobedience of local
Catholic leaders. But Arillo brings it all together, and gives the whole story
in one book.
While Arillo, may be seen as a Marcos
apologist, the information he gives in the book deserves a long look. I can
also understand why my parents back in the day cautioned me against support
Marcos’ opponents – the old people seem to know something that tends to be hidden
today. They believed Marcos was doing something right. Hence the comment, “Buti
Pa nung time ni Marcos (It was better during Marcos times).”
While I hold on to my earlier ideas, I
keep an open mind out for signs that Arillo may be right. His explanations seem
to hold a lot of water. This latest book also seems to have more of his opinion
than Greed and Betrayal did, but it can be distinguished from the fact. Who knows if his opinions prove to be right one day – thus, it seems
best to watch the signs of the times and see if they prove Arillo right.
Update: Apr 3, 2012, added a sentence to the Catholic Church paragraph.
Update: Apr 3, 2012, added a sentence to the Catholic Church paragraph.
Thanks a lot that I have read your blog! I didn't have an idea about the book until I read this, now I wanted to read the whole thing.
ReplyDelete