This essay aims to explain the economic, political, and social struggles of a Post-WWII Philippines. It will try to account for a number development efforts made within four decades from the country's decolonization in 1946 to its transition to democracy in 1986 and relate it to the modernization paradigm which was shaped by a number of historical events after the war. Such events were the rising into power of the United States of America and the success of its Marshall Plan or the European Recovery Program which was an effort to rebuild Europe from the ravages of war. It was a theory of development based upon the successes of the West and was prescribed to developing newly-decolonized nation-states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
What is this modernization paradigm? First of all, this framework is studied in three ways, one is economic modernization characterized by growth through large-scale industrialization and urbanization, and another is political modernization which deals with issues in democracy and political development in general and last is sociological modernization which emphasizes on social and psychological changes. From a developmental perspective, modernization's main focus is growth and that this said growth was inevitable. A Eurocentric blueprint was prescribed to underdeveloped and developing states and that this was what was required for development. Although it may not account for everything, the "modern hand" had a very tight grip on the country's development over the course of time.
The Philippines, after having promised its independence in1946, still had high economic dependence on United States' markets. A complete severance from the US seemed impractical, thus a campaign for an extension of free trade was made. The US congress, on 1946, then passed the Philippine Trade Act or the Bell Trade Act which allowed free trade to be continued to 1954.
