broadsword
Brigadier
You still live in a fantasy. You cited the Filipinos as your example of what exactly? That the reason most of them leave their country is not because they're deprived of "Freedoms" and are oppressed by the system in terms of their inability to exercise "free speech." Having lived in that country for almost a decade and learned 2 of their major languages (Tagalog, Cebuano/Visaya) their desires stem from the idea and illusion that anywhere is better than being in there country for their future and the future of their children. It's the economic condition, lack of real and meaningful opportunities for the majority of people to see themselves amongst the privileged few.
That country has been under a democratic system since 1946 when their countries independence from America was finally granted. Their system is almost the carbon copy of their American overlords and yet the level of corruption, stratified economy, hierarchical social strata and political figures accruing powers that has benefitted the few while impacting the lives of the many. But the Filipino people has been amazingly resilient and perpetual optimist or maybe a resigned group of people managed to accept their fate and assumed that their manifest destiny is to see themselves abroad to seek glory, fame, and fortune because their country is only there for the one's born into high class families; the one's with connections both with private businesses and public entities. Well connected to be accepted in elite schools etc....
The conditions of the Philippines wasn't a surprise to then former P.M. LKY of Singapore. He detested the very idea of the kind of system, a democratic system being pushed for and narrated by the west, especially by the U.S. every country that has followed the system and recommendations of the U.S. intellectual elites have rarely bring forth any real lasting change for the better. Their records on this regard have been of utter failures.
It's a given that no single individual if given a question wether they like or support corruption would tacitly support such practice. Not the least from people that have come from countries known for massive corruptions. But the question must be asked to you, the U.S. and it's supposed noble efforts to tackle corruption has been on the books for decades with little to nothing to show for it. As a matter of fact corruption happening in developing countries where US and it's western allies efforts has actually led to more sophisticated corruptions not less. Africa in terms of infrastructure investments has been lagging for decades and was frankly overlooked and ignored by the entire west minus their crock of s..t crocodile tears and concerns exercise whenever they convene their feel good "Policy forum talks" annually. Their extractive investments or interests lay in the continued harvesting of the vast minerals and resources. None cared for the well-being of the people, not their natural and physical environments etc...China comes into the scene and all these magic debt trap b.s. sprung up like weeds while actual physical infrastructures are materializing in front of the very eyes of the African people. Telecommunications, railways, paved roads, clean water, ELECTRICITY...all these are being done without China telling the countries in Africa to shape up first or pontificating a out ridding themselves of "corruption" before any work could commense.
If China had taken your advice and implemented such nonsense then you can bet that your feel good rhetoric would have led their efforts to nowhere but actual hostilities and loss of opportunity. Talking and creating wonderful prosaic narrative is not China's strength and that's a f..ng good thing that clearly separates them from the WEST. Africa has heard these shitty feel good talks since the colonial times and well all know what happened then. The Chinese and China managed to make huge inroads because they lead by making things happen; less talk and more action. The results speak for themselves.
So the question should then be asked to African countries or countries that's dealing with Chinese investments is this: are they better off with China's investment with all the infrastructure development or would they rather prefer the litany of criticisms from their western former overlords with nothing to show for? Corruption or no corruption.
Was Marcos corrupt? My original contention was about bribery by Chinese companies in Third World countries. So let's not veer off too far and into politics. Corruption happens in any political system.
Last edited:
