“I chose Bongbong Marcos as my president because I believe he can help our country be great again,” observed a 50-year-old Manila housewife on news that the son of the former dictator Ferdinand Marcos has won a landslide victory in the Philippines’ presidential election – marking “a remarkable comeback” for the Marcos family 36 years after they were run out of the country, says The Economist. Never underestimate the power of authoritarian nostalgia: it has established a new alliance of hardliners in the country. Marcos Jr’s vice-president is Sara Duterte, daughter of the current “strongman” leader. “In a system dominated by dynasties”, this is an “all-star team”.
The revisionist narrative
The dismay of political opponents is palpable – not least because a key force propelling Bongbong, 64, to power has been the effective rewriting of history. True to the populist playbook, he campaigned on social media safely away from the direct scrutiny of those who might question the rosy depiction of the Marcos years (1965-1986) as a “golden era” of high economic growth, social stability and monumental infrastructure building – when “every Filipino had pride and honour”. This revisionist narrative has played particularly well with generations too young to recall the brutal period of martial law preceding the revolution that swept Ferdinand Marcos and his pleasure-loving wife, Imelda, into exile, says Time. Slickly produced videos on TikTok and YouTube glorifying the late strongman helped secure support from 72% of voters aged 18-24, according to Pulse Asia. One older opponent describes the frightening sensation of “being gaslighted by somebody who wasn’t there”. The bare figures are sobering. Amnesty International estimates that under the dictator 70,000 “enemies of state” were arrested, 34,000 tortured and more than 3,000 killed.
When the Marcoses fled to Hawaii in 1986, they famously left behind most of Imelda’s “3,000-pair shoe collection”, but took with them at least 24 bars of gold and 22 boxes of cash. That was just to tide them over. The World Bank estimates the family may have amassed as much as $10bn in ill-gotten wealth. Their exile didn’t last long. Following Marcos Sr’s death, the family returned to the Philippines in 1991, ostensibly to face corruption charges, but immediately got stuck into politics again. Imelda (now 92 and described by Bongbong as the dynasty’s “supreme politician”) ran for president twice. Bongbong’s own less than stellar 30-year career – as congressman, senator and provincial governor – has left “little to show for it”, says The Economist. Descriptions of “BBM”, as he is known, are variations on a theme: “easy-going”, “laid-back”, “not very energetic”, “lazy”. “A cosmopolitan sort,” he has “a fondness for England, where he studied, and for American culture”. The Marcos family also has a long association with China.
Try 6 free issues of MoneyWeek today
Get unparalleled financial insight, analysis and expert opinion you can profit from.
Start your trial
Sign up for MoneyWeek’s free twice-daily newsletter.
Join more than 165,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with latest financial news, insights and expert analysis to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
Join more than 165,000 subscribers and keep yourself informed with latest financial news, insights and expert analysis to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
The fightback begins
Descriptions of “Ferrari-driving” Bongbong’s school days at Worth School in Sussex are hair-raising, says the Daily Mail. One of the smallest on the rugby pitch, “he took a flick knife to games which he is said to have brandished in scrums”. These days, he preaches “unity”, says Nikkei Asia – a pitch that helps him dodge calls for accountability, according to opponents. Although Bongbong is less authoritarian in style, his election victory has crushed hopes of redress.
Latest Videos FromMoneyWeek
The real problem, says The Economist, is that no one knows what Bongbong stands for – he’s renowned for listening “to the last person he spoke to”. This susceptibility to external influence is “a potential liability” for the Philippines at a delicate time in international politics. But “the greater risks are at home” where Filipinos “wedded to the ideals of the 1986 revolution” are committed to fighting the return of the Marcoses, in courts and on the streets. Bongbong’s triumphant restoration is likely to be marked by protests and instability.
