This section of the study aims to provide an understanding of how the condition

of the economy takes place in the Philippines during the Russian Revolution and
EDSA Revolution. According to Kesselman (2015), the success of states in
maintaining sovereign authority and control over their people is greatly affected by
their ability to ensure that sufficient goods and services are produced to meet their
populations' needs and demands. Pursuing economic performance is close to the top
of the political agenda of every state and governing the economy — how a state
organizes output and the magnitude and nature of its economic intervention — is the
main component in its general governance model. Furthermore, the core of financial
performance management includes approaches to choose an effort to enhance
economic performance, address economic crisis, and compete on global markets.

The Pre- Revolution Russian Economy

Russia's economy was in shambles during World War I and together with it were the
working circumstances and the lives of its lower-class people. The backbone of
Russia’s economy back then was its working class and the circumstances in which the
individuals were compelled to work were hard with the war. This was due to the reality
that there were no laws regarding pay, working hours, or circumstances of security
which meant that employees were compelled to accept an under-satisfactory quantity
of money. Additionally, the lack of safety regulations made working conditions
potentially dangerous as this meant that the employer had not spent money on the
facility's safety. The lack of regulation has proved a valid reason to revolt among the
workers. The conditions were not better outside the working environment. They found
themselves living in cramped and unhealthy conditions in the workers' own homes.
The lack of space and sanitation made it impossible for the workers to find peace in
their homes, where they had no room for themselves and could get sick from the
unpleasant conditions. Besides this, people had unreliable access to heat. Russia is
in the north where cold winters can be fatal easily. These appalling conditions were
the basis of the Russian Revolution at home and at work (Hackney, as cited in Essay,
UK 2018).

The Russian Revolution was a historic event responsible for the Russian government's
complete and total replacement. The revolution took place in two separate parts, the
first in February 1917. World War I was still raging at this time, and food supplies were
low because of the war, unemployment was high, and inflation was out of control.
These miserable conditions led to strike in Petrograd city by 385,000 workers. Upset
with the Tsar, the workers, the peasants and the soldiers rose up and demanded land
redistribution, and the tsarist forces were soon overthrown on 28 February.
Immediately thereafter, the Provisional Government, consisting of a coalition of
conservative, moderate, and liberal socialists, or the Mensheviks, took over the now
ungoverned Russia. The problems faced by the people still existed, even with the new
government. Soon the Bolshevik party would unite to overthrow the Provisional
Government. Moreover, from the very beginning, the Bolshevik majority party was a
major opponent of the Menshevik minority party. The Bolsheviks continuously
organized workers, peasants and soldiers for a second revolution in which they
planned to take over the Provisional Government and, in turn, placed control over
Russia in their own hands (Litwin, as cited in Essay, UK 2018).

Economy during the Provisional Government. The Provisional Government

replaced the tsar's government that collapsed during the revolution in March 1917.
The Provincial Government seek a reform but they had failed to do so. According to
Bitesize.com (2018), The Provisional Government did nothing to stop the war. In
fact, as desertions increased, it set up death squads to hunt down and execute
deserters. The soldiers came to hate the Provisional Government. They did nothing
to end the shortages of food and fuel in Petrograd. This was because it continued
the war, which was causing the shortages. Also, the Provisional Government did
nothing to solve the land problem. In the countryside, peasants started taking over
the land of the nobles, many of whom had run away and sent soldiers to take the
land back by force. The Provisional Government did little to deal with its opponents.
Even after the Bolsheviks rebelled in July 1917, it allowed Lenin to preach his
popular message of 'all power to the Soviets'. People came to despise the
Provisional Government the working class, peasants and soldiers.

October Revolution. On the Julian calendar on November 6 and 7, 1917 or October

24 and 25, which is why the event is often referred to as the October Revolution, left-
wing revolutionaries led by leader of the Bolshevik Party Vladimir Lenin launched an
almost bloodless coup d'état against the provisional government of the Duma. A group
of leaders from the bourgeois capitalist class of Russia had assembled the provisional
government. Instead, Lenin called for a Soviet government directly governed by
soldiers, peasants and workers councils. The Bolsheviks and their allies occupied
government buildings and other strategic locations in Petrograd, and soon formed a
new government with Lenin as its head. Lenin became the dictator of the world’s first
communist state (Cienciala & Meissner, 2009).

Hence, the portion of Russia in that conflict came to an end with the Bolshevik
Revolution of 1917. Soon a civil war started, which continued until 1920 with differing
intensity. It was immediately accompanied in 1921 by a famine. Economic recovery
started, but Stalin's drive to catch up and overtake the West through forced-march
industrialization had hit the Russian economy by 1928. Over these years, we have the
chance to observe several critical transitions in the Russian economy, including some
of the worst things that can occur to a nation. War and civil conflict have taken place.
Economic disintegration, isolation, and famine have affected the economy. State
capability collapsed; power was then recentralized in the hands of a new state that
pursued interventionism on an unprecedented scale (Harrison & Markevich, 2012).

Cienciala & Meissner (2009), also said that after the Bolshevik Revolution in late 1917,
civil war broke out in Russia. The Red and White Armies were included in the warring
factions. The Red Army was fighting for the Bolshevik government of Lenin. The White
Army represented a large group of loosely allied forces, including monarchists,
capitalists, and democratic socialism or anti-Bolsheviks supporters. The Russian Civil
War ended in 1923 when the Red Army of Lenin claimed victory and the Soviet Union
was established.

Although according to Kreis (as cited in Essay, UK (2018)) Lenin had once
again become Russia's leader, he began to develop ideas that he felt would bring the
economy back from its collapse. For Russia as a whole, his ideas involved wartime
communism. Under Lenin's plan, for the sake of the nation's economy, the government
took control of heavy industry, banking, and foreign trade. The idea of Lenin was to
use the industries to develop an efficient and modern economy of abundance.
Moreover, the government took control of landowners ' property and the states took
over trade. These large exchanges of power began to change the strength of Russia's
economy and laid the foundations for the New Economic Policy of Lenin. Lenin’s
wartime communism did not give him the success he had envisioned, and he felt that
it had been a mistake and not, as many had believed, a solution to the problem of a
socialized economy. Lenin created what was called the New Economic Policy after
being disappointed to bring the economy back to normal at a faster pace. Under the
New Economic Policy, the government stopped its policy of requisitioning the
peasants’ entire crop and allowed the peasants to make money for themselves by
selling their crop on their own accord. Another benefit given by the NEP was that
farmers were able to sell their crops either privately or to the state that allowed farmers
to take advantage of multiple sources to maximize their income.

The changes in its economy are clear as Russia continues to work under the New
Economic Policy. This is demonstrated by how private enterprise accounted for 40%
of Russian domestic trade in 1924, which depicts the large number of citizens who
were allowed to set up their own business to make money. In addition to private
enterprises, the overall economy was roughly equal to that of 1913 at an economic
level. The growth of the economy's strength was a huge improvement that brought it
back to a level before the First World War. The New Economic Plan outside Russia
has been described as the return of Russia to normal after its great revolution. The
New Economic Plan proved to be a major success after the Bolshevik party’s
economic experts learned to use fiscal policy, subsidies, wage and price controls, and
foreign trade to stabilize the economy and help the people come out of the nation’s
dreadful state. In the end, The New Economic Policy proved to be a triumphant
solution to Russia’s economic downfall (Kreis, as cited in Essay, UK 2018).

Philippine Economy during Marcos Regime

Meanwhile, according to Macaraeg (2018), in the late 1960s, the Philippines was
considered one of Asia's economic powerhouses. No wonder the Asian Development
Bank (ADB) had its headquarters in Manila when it was established in 1967. At that
time, the real or inflation-adjusted per capita GDP of the Philippines, a measure of
average per capita economic output, was the third highest in Southeast Asia – behind
Singapore and Malaysia, but ahead of Thailand and Indonesia. Then, suddenly, in the
early 1980s, Thailand and Indonesia surpassed the Philippines’ per capita GDP.
When Marcos assumed presidency in 1966, in courtesy of Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
(BSP) data, the country’s foreign debt was pegged at $56.7 billion. Among the last five
administrations, the Marcos regime amassed the largest foreign debt at more than $25
billion during its 20-year rule (1966-1985) or an annual accumulation of almost $1.3
billion. The largest increases in the country’s foreign debt happened during the Martial
Law period. Between 1973 and 1982, the indebtedness of the Philippines grew by 27
percent per year. From 1976 to 1982, BSP data show that the foreign debt was
swelling by an annual average of $2.8 billion (Padilla, 2004).

It was in the 1970s according to Tadem (2018), that Marcos took out huge
amounts of foreign currency loans that by the 1980s his regime could not repay.
He tried to hide the dire financial situation by overstating the figures for foreign
reserves. By then the economy was in a free fall: GDP growth dropped 5.3
percent, prices of primary export commodities fell by 50 percent, workers’ wages
were reduced, and unemployment hit one-fourth of the labor force. The crisis
worsened with the assassination of Ninoy Aquino in August 1983. As foreign
banks withheld their credit facilities, Marcos declared bankruptcy in October 1983
and sought a 90-day moratorium on principal debt payments. The World Bank
provided bailout loans to avert a default but with painful conditions like cutting the
government budget, peso devaluation, tariff dismantling, and ending subsidies.
Marcos had become the proverbial debt addict wholly dependent on foreign aid.

The Marcos administration was the period of the most massive infrastructure and
public works building spree in the history of the Philippines. Highways, bridges and
hospitals were built on a scale never seen before in the country. Schools and tertiary
institutions were built and established in the numbers dwarfing all those built beyond
the year 1986, the year Marcos was ousted from power. Surprisingly and interestingly,
many public works projects done during the Marcos administration were of excellent
quality that had stood the test of time and need not much maintenance compared to
the present public works projects that won’t even reach the minimum shelf life before
being given maintenance and replaced again and again. Not content with all these,
Marcos ensured that the country metamorphose from an agrarian country into a newly
industrialized one, and only during his term. To that end, he had 11 or so heavy
industry projects, including steel and chemical factories, ordered to be built at the
same timeframe. All these were built to improve the national economy. To do all this,
much money was needed. Massive debt again comes into play, for without it these
projects would be just hot air at all. Ironically, these apparently helped ruin the national
economy, as workers’ salaries plummeted, the prices of basic goods skyrocketed and
due to both the overall quality of life in the country lessened and worsened (Bisnar,
2018).

According to Watch (2015), the Philippine economy has declined by 7.3 percent
over two years. Inflation hit a high of 50% in 1984 and 23% in 1985, pushing loan rates
to approximately 27% in 1984 and 28% in 1985. The rate of unemployment hit 13
percent. The weak economy also experienced capital flight, with the peso devalued by
50 percent in 1984 and another 11 percent in 1985 leaving only about $1 billion in
foreign exchange that can only pay two months of imports. People were looking for a
way out in this state of the economy. Families have therefore migrated to other
countries. Businesses were falling due to rising borrowing costs and some people
were losing their jobs. When the per capita GDP of the country only began to recover
in the early 2000s, its neighbour’s in Southeast Asia had already left the Philippines
behind.

Post-Edsa Economy. However, the collapse of Marcos and the restoration of

democratic and civil rights did not translate into a rapid economic recovery. Because
Corazon Aquino's administration and its successors prioritized foreign debt payment
over expenditure on critical infrastructure and social services, economic growth was
slow to recover. In fact, only 22 years later, the real per capita GDP of the Philippines
surpassed its pre-1983 crisis level. It was only in 2004 that the country hit $1,768 GDP
per capita, finally exceeding its previous peak in 1982. By then, it lagged far behind its
neighbors, especially Thailand and Indonesia, which grew faster in the meantime. By
2016, the country's GDP per capita was $2,753, less than half of Thailand's $5,902
and just over two-thirds of Indonesia's $3,974 (Macaraeg, 2018).

After the EDSA People Power in 1986, economic growth started to rise again
noticeably. Of course, it has since fallen a few times due to other financial crises, but
the bust after the revolution never exceeded the figures recorded in martial law. The
average Filipino’s standard of living was way better pre-martial law, as measured by
the country’s GDP per capita or the country’s economic output per person (Macaraeg,
2019).

Moreover, only economic growth that was unstable before the revolution — consumer
prices during martial law also experienced crazy fluctuations. The highest increase in
consumer prices year-on-year was recorded at 50.3 percent in 1984, the highest
record since 1960 (Macaraeg, 2019).

A big difference between the economy before and after the 1986 EDSA revolution is
the narrower swings between economic booms and bust. While GDP growth in the
early years of martial law has grown to record highs since the 1960s, lows have also
fallen in the worst post-war economic crisis in the country in 1984 and 1985. Economic
volatility has eased considerably after 1986 and especially since the early 2000s
(Subido, 2017).

Subido, L. (2017). The Economy Before and After the EDSA Revolution. Retrieved
from https://www.entrepreneur.com.ph/news-and-events/-infographic-the-
economy-before-and-after-the-edsa-revolution-a1672-20170222

Macaraeg, P. (2018). Did the 1986 EDSA Revolution Make a Big Difference on the
Economy? Retrieved from https://www.entrepreneur.com.ph/news-and-
events/did-the-1986-edsa-revolution-make-a-big-difference-on-the-economy-
a00222-20180226

Macaraeg, P. (2019). The Economic Impact of the 1986 EDSA People Power
Revolution. Retrieved from https://www.esquiremag.ph/money/industry/edsa-
people-power-economic-impact-a00287-20190224-lfrm

Essays, UK. (2018). The economy of Russia before Lenin. Retrieved from
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/history/the-economy-of-russia-before-
lenin.php?vref=1
Harrison, M. & Markevich, A. (2012). Russia’s national income in war and revolution,
1913 to 1928. Retrieved from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/history/the-
economy-of-russia-before-lenin.php?vref=1

Cienciala, A. & Meissner, D. (2009). Russian Revolution. Retrieved from

https://www.history.com/topics/russia/russian-revolution

Bisnar, J.M (2018). How did the Philippine debt grow so much during Ferdinand
Marcos. Retrieved from https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-Philippine-
debt-grow-so-much-during-Ferdinand-Marcos-presidency

Tadem, E. (2018). Philippines: The Marcos debt. Retrieved from

http://www.cadtm.org/Philippines-The-Marcos-debt

Padilla, A. (2004). Taxpayers To Pay Marcos Debt Until 2025. Retrieved from
https://www.bulatlat.com/news/4-33/4-33-marcosdebt.html

Bitesize.com (2018). Provisional Government and its problems. Retrieved from

https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z2tp2p3/revision/2