1. Was the torture, disappearance or death of at least 10,000 Filipinos during the course of his father’s martial law regime a service to the country? If so, in what way? Ferdinand Marcos did say, early on, that there was a tradeoff between political freedoms and economic growth—to get more bread, we have to give up some freedom. As we will see in the following, we not only lost our freedom, we lost our bread too.
2. Was the coddling of the military and the financial rewards given them during his regime a service to the country? In what way? Because that “tradition” seems to have been continued all the way up to now, and I still can’t see what benefits have come from it.
3. Was the coddling of certain favored businessmen—the so-called “cronies”—a service to the country? If so, in what way?
4. Was the collapse of the economy in late 1983 a service to the country? If so, in what way? The Philippines was the only country in Asia that succumbed to the international debt crisis. And it took 17 years before the Philippines was able to regain the real per capita income levels we lost during that crisis.
5. Was the accumulation of foreign debt by the Marcos regime a service to the country? If so, in what way? Our external debt to GDP ratio rose from 31 percent in 1971 to 94 percent in 1986—with the debt service claiming one-third of the national government budget and nothing to show for it but a collapsed economy.