Challenging populist politics

Dindo Manhit, President of the Stratbase ADR Institute

The election spirit is in the air!

Aside from the regular holidays that many Filipinos hold dear, elections have always been a passion for the general population. With more than 18,000 local posts up for grabs, local participation is expected to be massive. Sadly, we can also expect more election-related violence as local elections are by nature more personal.

On a general scale, the upcoming May 13 elections represent three fundamental challenges that the present electoral and political landscape offer.


The first challenge refers to disputing the populist politics that has gained momentum under the Duterte administration. As elections may be associated with the popularity and clout of the incumbent president and his administration, it is important to note that Duterte continues to be popular and has retained a 74% satisfaction rating based on recent surveys. Such positive rating constitutes the political capital upon which supporters and followers could bank during the elections.

After more than two years in office, however, Duterte’s populist promises by and large proved to be mere political rhetoric.

True, there was the increase in the salaries of uniformed personnel and the upgrading of military logistics equipment and some measures that seemed impossible in the past decade, such as Free Tertiary Education, Free Irrigation Service, and the Universal Health Care Bill.

But many experts are apprehensive about the sustainability of these measures, as they require huge amounts of funding. Many also question whether these populist initiatives are timely since the government has also embarked on an ambitious P8-trillion infrastructure program until 2022.

Nevertheless, populist issues dominate the campaign platform of majority of the candidates. These issues strongly appeal to the emotions of voters, but the solution may not be rational and sustainable. In most cases, national candidates prioritize gut issues such as food, health, and education.


In the face of such populist politics, a viable alternative is to promote a program- or platform-based leadership and politics. Two things come to mind — while focusing more on the top national concerns of the Filipinos, i.e., controlling inflation, increasing/improving workers’ pay, reducing poverty, and creating jobs, the top personal concerns related to health, education, victimization of crime, and access to jobs should also be prioritized. And while offering an enduring solution to these problems instead of purely relying on palliative means, the programs and solutions should be realistic as well.

In exploring political platforms for the upcoming elections, the Stratbase ADR Institute through its project Democracy Watch commissioned a survey (December 16 to 19, 2018) on the “Qualities that One is Looking for in a Senatorial Candidate of the Philippines.” It showed that 25% of the respondents listed “will not be corrupt” as among the qualities they are looking for a senatorial candidate. By area, 25% of respondents in the National Capital Region, 26% in the rest of Luzon, 27% in the Visayas and 22 % in Mindanao said they are looking for candidates “who will not be corrupt.”

Accordingly, the top quality that Filipino voters look for in a senatorial candidate is “not corrupt.” Candidates who have “concern for the poor” emerged as the second top quality (22%), followed by “good personal characteristics” which was listed by 21% of the respondents, while the fourth top quality is “trustworthy.”

Other qualities cited by respondents include “has concern/helpful to those in need” (20%); “walks his talk/fulfills promises” (14%); “can give solutions to the problems of the country” (9%); “approachable” (7%); “has good leadership qualities” (6%); “knows how to listen and confer with other people” (5%); “has faith in God” (5%); “has political will” (3%); and “educated/intelligent/bright” (3%).

In neutralizing populist politics, the value of citizenship comes into the fore. Anchored on critical participation, the electorate should analyze a candidate’s credibility, competence, and integrity. These can be measured by looking into their education, experience, records, and advocacies/platforms. Further, the population should embody the democratic principle behind the electoral process — to empower responsible leaders and ensure democracy.


Third, the act of making elections viable, participatory, and inclusive begs to question the predominance of political dynasties in Philippine politics. According to Dean Donald Mendoza, “the elimination of fat dynasties will free up to 25% of local government positions for the young up and coming leaders.” The elimination of fat dynasties thus makes democracy inclusive. This will counter the worrying trend that he observed between 2007 and 2016, in which the “dynastic share or the number of powerful clans per position rose from 75% to 78% among district representatives; 70% to 81% among governors; and 58% to 70% among mayors.”

Frustratingly, the Anti-Political Dynasty bill (and all its different versions) has been passed from Congress to Congress since 1987 and still remains pending.

As the battle against political dynasties and traditional politics is a long and winding struggle, the promotion of a program- and platform-based politics is the necessary first step. It is also a deterrent against the proliferation of strongman politics and populist leaders. It also addresses the crisis in the political leadership aggravated by the weak character of Philippine political parties.



This article was originally published in BusinessWorld.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s