An Atomic Bomb Couldn't Stop Japan But FILIPINO FIRST POLICY Stopped The Philippines
 |
| Filipino-Japanese Journal |
Yesterday was the anniversary of the bombing of Hiroshima. The bombings are often controversial, as they show the history of violence. This reminds me of an argument that I often heard: "If the Philippines didn't have its Marcos Years, we would've still been richer." However, I raise the harsh reality that the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were far worse than what a kleptocracy can do in 20 years. The devastation was huge. In fact, reading this from the History website article by Sarah Pruitt made me think that this devastation could do more damage than a kleptocracy:
On August 6, 1945, just days after the Potsdam Conference ended, the U.S. bomber Enola Gay dropped the uranium bomb known as “Little Boy” on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Despite its devastating effects, Japan didn’t offer unconditional surrender right away, as the United States had hoped. Then on August 8, Soviet forces invaded Japanese-occupied Manchuria, violating an earlier non-aggression pact signed with Japan.
Herken argues that the Soviet invasion may have had at least as great an effect on Japanese morale as the first atomic bomb. “The last hope for the Japanese government, the peace faction, was that the Soviet Union might actually agree to negotiate a peace with the United States as a neutral party,” he explains. “But once the Soviets invaded Manchuria, it was clear that was not going to happen.”
On August 9, U.S. forces dropped “Fat Man,” a plutonium bomb, on Nagasaki. Together, the two bombs dropped in Japan would kill more than 300,000 people, including those who died instantly and those who perished from radiation and other lingering effects of the explosions.
This made me think of the Japanese occupation during the days of the Japanese Empire. Today, the Chrysanthemum Throne is just a symbolic institution. It was in 1945 that Japan formally surrendered on August 15, 1945. Later on, Emperor Hirohito renounced his divinity on January 1, 1946, leading to the Humanity Declaration.
What made Japan a better economic power than the Philippines, then?
After World War II
The Japanese economy lay utterly devastated at the end of World War II (1945). The immediate postwar period was one of hard struggle to achieve reconstruction and stability. Under the Allied occupation forces, land and labor reforms were carried out, and the plan for creating a self-sustaining economy was mapped out by American banker Joseph Dodge. The outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 created a huge demand for Japanese goods and set off an investment drive that laid the foundations for a long period of extraordinary economic activity. While investment in plants and equipment was spurred by an expanding domestic market, Japan also began pursuing strong export policies. Growing demand overseas for Japanese goods led to annual trade surpluses, which (with a brief interlude in 1979–80) became perennial by the late 1960s.By the early 1970s Japan’s rapid rate of economic growth had begun to slacken, as the price of imported petroleum soared, labor costs increased, the value of the national currency, the yen, rose against foreign currencies, and overall global demand for Japanese goods weakened. In addition, distortions resulting from the earlier quick pace of growth had begun to show: Japan’s standard of living had not increased as rapidly as had the overall economy up to that point—in large part because of the high percentage of capital reinvestment in those years—but also Japan was under increasing pressure from its trading partners (notably the United States) to allow the yen to appreciate even more in value and to liberalize strong import restrictions that had been enacted to protect Japan’s domestic market.By the mid-1980s Japan’s standard of living had increased to the point that it was comparable to that found in other developed countries. In addition, in 1985 Japan agreed with its trading partners to let the yen appreciate against the U.S. dollar, which led to a doubling of the yen’s value within two years. This action and other efforts at restraining exports encouraged Japanese companies to begin moving production bases overseas. At the same time, a speculative “bubble” arose in the prices of stock shares and real estate, and its bursting at the beginning of the 1990s sparked a severe economic downturn. The Nikkei 225 average (the main stock index of the Tokyo Stock Exchange), which had reached an all-time high in 1989, dropped to only half that much within a year, and housing prices in urban areas also plunged.Economic growth was essentially stagnant throughout the 1990s—in what came to be known in Japan as the “lost decade”—even though a variety of economic policies were adopted and tried. The country experienced a serious recession at the end of the decade. Conditions improved after the turn of the 21st century, though growth rates were modest and were punctuated with periodic slumps. However, by 2000 Japan was facing the fact that an increasing number of postwar “baby boom” workers would be retiring, while, with the country’s population growth also stagnant, fewer young people would be entering the workforce. In addition, Japan, like the rest of the world, was hard hit by the global economic recession that began at the end of 2007 and took hold in earnest in 2008. Nonetheless, Japan continued to have one of the world’s highest per capita GDPs, and it experienced continued annual trade surpluses until the global recession following the financial crisis of 2007–08.
Japan fell under the American occupation of Japan. It is an interesting note that Douglas MacArthur, who was famous for his "I shall return!" in Leyte, also led the occupation and reconstruction of Japan from 1945-1952. In fact, Japan began its new phase when the monarchy was but symbolic; the form of government was changed to parliamentary, and Japanese Pride Economics was slowly dismantled. Instead, Japan began its phases, learned new things, and soon liberalized import restrictions to help the Japanese market progress.
In fact, it made me think of how Japan emerged after the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. One can think of many stuff that came out of Japan. Otakus may think of Tokusatsu and video games (such as Nintendo, Sega, and Sony). In my case, I would like to think of Japanese inventions that shaped the world. You might think of the rice cooker, the lithium-ion battery, the Walkman, the CD technology, the DVD technology (though it had Western help), the Blu-Ray, the QR Code, the bright blue LED, and many more. These things weren't born out of an isolationist bubble but out of economic liberalization.
In short, Japan refused to return to the same way as the Tokugawa Era and the protectionist era of the Japanese Empire.
Where did the Philippines go wrong (until today)
Second : Concentrate on economics not politics or more accurately, politicking . Lift restrictions on trade and investment. Dismantle the web of measures which keep out foreign companies and make Philippine companies compete to survive, not thrive at the expense of ordinary Filipinos.
Instead, the problem was that the Philippines continued on the path of the Filipino First Policy. LKY even gave this warning in Third World to First, describing the consequences that still ring true until today:
... Millions of Filipino men and women had to leave their country for jobs abroad beneath their level of education. Filipino professionals, whom we recruited to work in Singapore are good as our own. Indeed, their architects, artists, and musicians are more artistics and creative than ours. Hundreds and thousands of them have left for Hawaii and for the American mainland. It is a problem the soltuion to which has not been made easier by the workers of a Philippine version of the American constitution.
Marcos was overthrown, but the Filipino First Policy remained. I must admit that some Filipino factcheckers still want to make it look like the 60-40 policy isn't protecting the oligarchs. Filipino economist Andrew J. Masigan wrote in the Philippine Star:
From the year 2000 up to the present, Vietnam and Indonesia took their fair share of FDIs, leaving the Philippines further behind. The country’s intake of foreign investments is less than half of what Vietnam and Indonesia realize. No surprise, our exports have also been the lowest among our peers. The lack of investments in manufacturing capacities have left us no choice but to export our own people.
Imbedded in the Constitution are industries in which foreigners are precluded. These include agriculture, public utilities, transportation, retail, construction, media, education, among others. Further, the Constitution limits foreigners from owning more than 40 percent equity in corporations. Foreigners are barred from owning land too. These provisions caused us to lose out on many investments which would have generated jobs, exports and taxes. Not too long ago, we lost a multibillion-dollar investment from an American auto manufacturing company that chose to invest in Thailand instead. We lost a multi-billion smartphone plant by Samsung, who located in Vietnam.
Sure, the Public Service, Foreign Investment and Trade Liberalization Acts were recently amended, allowing foreigners to participate in a wider berth of industries with less rigid conditions. But it is still not enough. The Philippines remains the least preferred investment destination among our peers.
Our flawed economic laws are the reason why our agricultural sector has not industrialized and why food security eludes us. It is also why our manufacturing sector has not fully developed. It is why we lost the opportunity to be Asia’s entertainment capital despite our Americanized culture (Netflix located its Asian headquarters in Singapore, Disney in Malaysia, MTV in Hong Kong and Paramount Studios in Taiwan). It is why our education standards are among the lowest in the world. It is why many industries are oligopolies owned by only a handful of families.
If we look at the Japanese Constitution of 1946, it may be older, but it's actually better-written. My argument for charter change isn't necessarily that the Philippine Constitution is about to turn 40. Instead, the real problem has been that the current Constitution is faulty. No economic policies are put into Japan's constitution. Any economic restrictions that Japan has are put into legislation. This makes it easier to adjust the economy. The economy can overheat at times, so a protectionist measure can be passed to slow down the economy. These policies are often adjusted without the need for a constitutional amendment, which requires 2/3 of a house vote (Article XVII), making it harder.
As said, we need to stop relying on Motoo Konishi's statement on the late Benigno Simeon "Noynoy" C. Aquino III. I often ask, "Was it just a coincidence that Japan has better leadership because of the parliamentary system?" That's what I ask some clueless lady on Facebook who kept quoting Noynoy as a reason to never pursue constitutional reform. Yes, Konishi gave some praise to Noynoy. However, we can ever keep getting stuck with nostalgia. Instead, we need to improve and move forward.
