Discussion: Philippine Dictatorship in the 80s and beyond

So, would it be feasible for Ferdinand Marcos (and his son) to maintain his dictatorship through the 80s and beyond? What would be needed to maintain such a thing?

Would Marcos still have enough of a power base to retain control and restore a semblance of order in the Philippines if the EDSA Revolution became violent, or would an earlier PoD be needed?

And if such a thing could be achieved, how would it affect the wider world?
 
Macoy needs to kill an awful lot of people. And even then, he need to convince the US that letting him stay in power is good for her national interest.
 
So, would it be feasible for Ferdinand Marcos (and his son) to maintain his dictatorship through the 80s and beyond? What would be needed to maintain such a thing?

If Ferdinand Marcos and his heirs want to maintain dictatorship beyond 1986 is to expropriate further the properties of their opponents and their supporters, to the extent that most or all of them would be sent into exile primarily to the United States, and have the entire country be totally populated by his loyalists and apathetic people. Marcos needs an economic stimuli to sustain his dictatorship beyond 2000 like massive oil and gas discoveries in Recto Bank or anywhere in Mindanao like Sulu Sea and Liguasan Marsh. Marcos also needs to let Gerardo Sicat and Cesar Virata running the economic affairs of the country after oil price crash in 1981 and avoid debt default altogether.

The reason on why his Indonesian counterpart, Suharto, stayed in power until 1998 was because of oil revenues which were able to cushion Indonesia's economy during the oil price crash in the 1980s while at the same time, he let his economic advisers run the economic affairs and successfully able to transform Indonesia into an export-driven mixed community-manufacturing economy unlike ours and had Marcos done what Suharto did, we would have been more economically competitive than Indonesia as the former had higher GDP per capita in 1970 over the latter and if we had growth trajectory similar to Indonesia from 1970, our per capita would have been roughly $10,000 today like Malaysia in OTL.

Would Marcos still have enough of a power base to retain control and restore a semblance of order in the Philippines if the EDSA Revolution became violent, or would an earlier PoD be needed?

Marcos cannot anymore and would be unlikely to fire the protesters with bullets and bombs. He was not that stupid to do that, by the way. Marcos in 1986 was already dying and had he won the snap election convincingly, he would stood down from the presidency or die in office by 1989 and let Arturo Tolentino succeed him. The reason on why he restored the position of vice president was to provide an orderly succession in case of his inevitable resignation or death and to save the country from civil war between Imelda and JPE's supporters.

And if such a thing could be achieved, how would it affect the wider world?

The United States government would surely support the surviving Marcos regime, provided that there are semblances of democracy like orderly elections and free press which might be possible under Bongbong or Imee's regimes not Imelda.
 
So, would it be feasible for Ferdinand Marcos (and his son) to maintain his dictatorship through the 80s and beyond?

He could have maintained it a couple of years winning a Civil war 1986. But the numbers of reality during the Marcos were going to catch him up.

Poverty rate was 58.5% 1985 accdg to this http://nap.psa.gov.ph/poverty/TCPovStat/forum/group discussion, 14oct03/03oct14FinalDiscussions.pdf

And the economy just shrank 2 straight years of roughly around 7% per annum accdg to this.

http://www.indexmundi.com/philippines/gdp_real_growth_rate.html

Inflation rate spiked at 60%+ during 1985 accdg to this:http://www.tradingeconomics.com/philippines/inflation-cpi

Meaning if Marcos won any civil war, he still had a bad economy to fix. but in this ATL no one will lend him money like how the rest of the world lent money to Cory.

Here is an except from Lee Kwan Yew's book
"International outrage over the killing resulted in foreign banks stopping all loans to the Philippines, which owed over US$25 billion and could not pay the interest due. This brought Marcos to the crunch. He sent his minister for trade and industry, Bobby Ongpin, to ask me for a loan of US$300-500 million to meet the interest payments. I looked him straight in the eye and said, “We will never see that money back.” Moreover, I added, everyone knew that Marcos was seriously ill and under constant medication for a wasting disease. What was needed was a strong, healthy leader, not more loans."

What would be needed to maintain such a thing?
No one can maintain permanent power in the Philippines due to its history, democratic institution/culture placed by both the Americans and the locals themselves in 1899.

Those countries that maintained absolute power had to accept nor have not have tasted democracy, e.g. Saudi Arabia.

Would Marcos still have enough of a power base to retain control and restore a semblance of order in the Philippines if the EDSA Revolution became violent, or would an earlier PoD be needed?

There was still the US factor. US didnt want the communist take over or snatch the reigns while the Pro Marcos and the RAM/Pro Cory slaughtered each other.

But to answer your question, it requires an earlier PoD wherein Marcos actually manages the economy better than his predecessors. Marcos not being Marcos.

And if such a thing could be achieved, how would it affect the wider world?
Effect would minor in the grander stages of the Superpowers.
 
Macoy needs to kill an awful lot of people. And even then, he need to convince the US that letting him stay in power is good for her national interest.

Hm. So let's say the Vietnam War ends on an even worse note than it did, with an earlier American defeat. And then the Communist guerrillas in the Philippines have victories at inopportune moments during the 70s. And some of the policies Joseph Solis mentioned are enacted.

Would that work to keep the boat sailing until at least the present era?

---

TBH, I'm looking for a way to write a Philippine Civil War TL. Possibilities abound, but I'm not sure how to go about it.
 
if you're looking for a Civil War, that's simple - Marcos heeds Ver's advice to flee to Ilocos Norte, while Tadiar develops a sudden lack of scruples and salvages a buch of clergy on live television. It'll essentially be Syria with the Communists playing the role of Daesh.
 
Hm. So let's say the Vietnam War ends on an even worse note than it did, with an earlier American defeat. And then the Communist guerrillas in the Philippines have victories at inopportune moments during the 70s. And some of the policies Joseph Solis mentioned are enacted.

Would that work to keep the boat sailing until at least the present era?

Requires a PoD before Marcos became a politician. Marcos designating the control of the economy to Virata in 1970 requires a change of how Marcos thinks and/or decides. Having Cesar Virata managing the economy butterflies the economic problems in the early 80s, which also butterflies certain Marcos' projects including the white elephants.

Meaning ATL Marcos not being OTL Marcos.

A Suharto like attitude means Marcos will think about resigning when the going gets tough like OTL Suharto.

However, in Joseph Solis suggestion, also requires genocide/mass murder since not every non-Marcos loyalist Filipino would be wiling to leave the Philippines. This will make keeping favors to the US and her allies tricky.
 
if you're looking for a Civil War, that's simple - Marcos heeds Ver's advice to flee to Ilocos Norte, while Tadiar develops a sudden lack of scruples and salvages a buch of clergy on live television. It'll essentially be Syria with the Communists playing the role of Daesh.

That's what I'm looking for, but is it possible to make it happen a generation later, possibly around the end of the Cold War?
 
Top