IBON Foundation's FLAWED Proposal in "Follow the Money"
 |
| Bilyonaryo News Channel |
“We have to get over this thinking that foreign capital will save us,” he said. “We also have to get over this thinking that we can’t produce enough food and therefore have to import everything. More household purchasing power means more aggregate demand. More aggregate demand means a bigger market for Filipino agriculture and Filipino industry. If Filipino agriculture and Filipino industry develop, that’s more jobs, more incomes, and more purchasing power – a virtuous cycle.”
I even want to ask what Africa means by a rational Philippine industrialization policy. This makes me think that the late Lee Kuan Yew would call his as third world mentality. Sure, we need to get over the idea that we can't produce enough food or that we need to build the local industries. However, Africa's statement here, where he says, "We have to get over this thinking that foreign capital will save us," is dangerous. People might say that I'm "addicted to foreign approval" because I keep quoting foreigners. Please, I don't quote foreigners because they're foreign, but because of the results. Why would I listen to Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr., when Mahathir Mohamad's Malaysia proved which grandfather's words proved true? The same can be true as to why I would listen to LKY not just on advice about the Marcoses, but also on LKY's advice on how the Philippines can become a better country.
Why would I take the words of Africa when LKY actually didn't just say it, but his arguments are backed up by the results. Singapore used to be a third-world country, and LKY decided, "We're going to be different." The founder of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Kishore Mahbubani, is another person I cite to counter Davide's arguments. Unlike Davide, Mahbubani cited how FDI can be used to do what Africa wants. It's because Mahbubani understood that FDIs would help create jobs, bring capital, bring markets, and train the labor force. Hasn't Africa even heard of that one? Africa's advice is really looking at MNC on the "dependency school model" instead of the catalyst model.
LKY had said this before, and I feel the need to show this quote again, from his book Third World to First, page 58:
The accepted wisdom of development economists at the time was that MNCs were exploiters of cheap land, labor, and raw materials. This "dependency school" of economists argued that MNCs continued the colonial pattern of exploitation that left the developing countries selling raw materials to and buying consumer goods from the advanced countries. MNCs controlled technology and consumer preferences and formed alliances with their host governments to exploit the people and keep them down. Third World leaders believed this theory of neocolonialist exploitation, but Keng Swee and I were not impressed. We had a real-life problem to solve and could not afford to be conscribed by any theory or dogma. Anyway, Singapore had no natural resources for MNCs to exploit. All it had were hard-working people, good basic infrastructure, and a government that was determined to be honest and competent. Our duty was to create a livelihood for 2 million Singaporeans. If MNCs could give our workers employment and teach them technical and engineering skills and management know-how, we should bring in the MNCs.
This is the kind of thinking Africa is still trying to promote over time. This is what IBON is trying to promote over time. The results are clear that Singapore progressed because it abandoned what the development economists of their day kept saying. LKY didn't say that he would just trust the Singaporean economists of his day. Instead, LKY chose to be pragmatic by learning from the better countries. LKY saw the progress of other countries and realized that to make Singapore better, don't just trust the local economist, all the time.
Several countries that tried to use the self-develop first approach failed. Maoist China tried it and it failed. In fact, the true Great Leap Forward wasn't with Mao Zedong but with Deng Xiaoping. Deng introduced Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. It didn't take long for Vietnam to follow suit late in 1986 with Doi Moi. The reality is that Vietnam, a country rich in natural resources, accepted FDI while it was still poor. Vietnam didn't say, "We must develop our country first before we accept FDI." Instead, they decided to accept FDI and use the funds to industrialize Vietnam. Vietnam developed its industries through whatever FDI brought to it. It was through FDI that Vietnam became a powerhouse that managed to sell its products as export-worthy.
This is why I just can't take IBON as a valid economic think tank. Why should Filipinos only rely on Filipino economists if their own economists can't give effective advice? If anything, I can only say IBON is still relying on proven wrong economic rhetoric. It's an economic think-tank that great thinkers like LKY or Mahathir would dismiss as stuck with a third-world mentality.
Right now, Africa needs to move beyond slogans. He should provide empirical evidence: point to a single developing nation in the modern era that achieved sustained prosperity by focusing exclusively on domestic industry while rejecting global trade and investment. Until then, these arguments aren't 'pro-people'—they are just noise that keeps the status quo firmly in place.
