Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-21T01:59:08.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strong Demands and Weak Institutions: The Origins and Evolution of the Democratic Deficit in the Philippines

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2016

Paul D. Hutchcroft  and
Joel Rocamora
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

No country in Asia has more experience with democratic institutions than the Philippines. Over more than a century—from the representational structures of the Malolos republic of 1898 to the political tutelage of American colonial rule, from the cacique democracy of the postwar republic to the restoration of democracy in the People Power uprising of 1986—Filipinos know both the promise of democracy and the problems of making democratic structures work for the benefit of all. Some 100 years after the introduction of national-level democratic institutions to the Philippines, the sense of frustration over the character of the country's democracy is arguably more apparent than ever before. On the one hand, the downfall of President Joseph Estrada in January 2001 revealed the capacity of many elements of civil society to demand accountability and fairness from their leaders; on the other hand, the popular uprisings of April and May 2001—involving thousands of urban poor supporters of Estrada—highlighted the continuing failure of democratic structures to respond to the needs of the poor and excluded. Philippine democracy is, indeed, in a state of crisis.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of East Asian Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , May 2003 , pp. 259 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © East Asia Institute 

References

Abad, Florencio. 1997. “Should the Philippines Turn Parliamentary? The Challenge of Democratic Consolidation and Institutional Reform.” In Santos, Soliman, ed., Shift. Manila: Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Abueva, Jose. 2002. “Dissatisfaction with the Way Our Democracy Works.” In Abueva, Jose, ed., Towards a Federal Republic of the Philippines: A Reader. Manila: Center for Social Policy and Governance, 2002, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
Alejo, Myrna, and Rocamora, Joel. 2000. “Explaining Erap.” Political Brief (February 2000): 16–27.Google Scholar
Anderson, Benedict. 1988. “Cacique Democracy and the Philippines: Origins and Dreams.” New Left Review, no. 169: 3–33.Google Scholar
Balisacan, Arsenio M. 2001. “Did the Estrada Administration Benefit the Poor?” In Doronila, Amando, ed., Between Fires: Fifteen Perspectives on the Estrada Crisis. Manila: Anvil.Google Scholar
Banlaoi, Rommel C., and Carlos, Clarita. 1996. Elections in the Philippines: From the Pre-Colonial Period to the Present. Manila: Konrad Adenauer Foundation.Google Scholar
Bautista, Banzon, Rose, Maria Cynthia. 2002. “People Power 2: ‘The Revenge of the Elite on the Masses’?” In Doronila, Armando, ed., Between Fires: Fifteen Perspectives on the Estrada Crisis. Manila: Anvil.Google Scholar
Bevis, Gwendolyn G. 2001. “Party Time? The Formation of Programmatic Parties in the Philippines.” Unpublished manuscript, Department of Political Science, University of Wisconsin–Madison.Google Scholar
Bolongaita, Emiliano P. 1996. “The Breakdown of Philippine Democracy: A Comparative Institutional Analysis.” Ph.D. diss., Notre Dame University.Google Scholar
Bonner, Raymond. 1987. Waltzing with a Dictator: The Marcoses and the Making of American Policy. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
Choi, Jungog. 2001. “Philippine Democracies Old and New: Elections, Term Limits, and Party Systems.” Asian Survey 41, No. 3: 488–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corpuz, Onofre D. 1957. The Bureaucracy in the Philippines. Manila: University of the Philippines Institute of Public Administration.Google Scholar
Cullinane, Michael. 1989. “Ilustrado Politics: The Response of the Filipino Educated Elite to American Colonial Rule, 1898–1907.” Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Cullinane, Michael. Forthcoming 2003. Ilustrado Politics: Filipino Elite Responses to American Rule, 1898–1908. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
David, Randolph. 2001. “Political Parties in the Philippines.” In David, Randolph, ed., Reflections on Sociology and Philippine Society. Manila: University of the Philippines Press, 2001, pp. 170–128.Google Scholar
de Dios, Emmanuel S., and Hutchcroft, Paul D. 2002/2003. “Philippine Political Economy: Examining Current Challenges in Historical Perspective.” In Balisacan, Arsenio and Hill, Hal, eds., The Philippine Economy: Development, Policies, and Challenges. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press (2002); and New York: Oxford University Press (2003).Google Scholar
Golay, Frank. 1998. Face of Empire: United States–Philippine Relations, 1898–1946. Madison: University of Wisconsin Center for Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
Gutierrez, Eric. 1994. The Ties That Bind: A Guide to Family, Business, and Other Interests in the Ninth House of Representatives. Metro Manila: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism and Institute for Popular Democracy.Google Scholar
Gutierrez, Eric U., et al. 1992. All in the Family: A Study of Elites and Power Relations in the Philippines. Quezon City: Institute for Popular Democracy.Google Scholar
Hayden, Joseph Ralston. 1942. The Philippines: A Study in National Development. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hedman, Eva-Lotta E. 2001. “Cycles of Protest in Philippine Political and Civil Society: EDSA Dos in Comparative Historical Perspective.” Presented to the Fourth European Philippine Studies Conference, Alcala de Henares, Spain.Google Scholar
Hernandez, Carolina G. 1984. “The Role of the Military in Contemporary Philippine Society.” Diliman Review 32 (1) (January-February): 1, 16–24.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, Paul D. 1998. Booty Capitalism: The Politics of Banking in the Philippines. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, Paul D. 2000. “Colonial Masters, National Politicos, and Provincial Lords: Central Authority and Local Autonomy in the American Philippines, 1900–1913.” Journal of Asian Studies 59, No. 2 (May): 277–306.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, Paul D. 2001. “State Formation, State Reformation: Deciphering Decentralization in the Philippines and Thailand.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Hutchcroft, Paul D. 2002. “Reflections on a Reverse Image: South Korea Under Park Chung Hee and the Philippines Under Ferdinand Marcos.” Prepared for a collaborative research project on the Park Chung Hee era, organized by the East Asia Institute, Korea University, and the Asia Center, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Ileto, Reynaldo. 1979. Pasyon and Revolution: Popular Movements in the Philippines, 1840–1910. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
Kerkvliet, Benedict J. 1977. The Huk Rebellion: A Study of Peasant Revolt in the Philippines. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kerkvliet, Benedict J., and Mojares, Resil B., ed. 1991. From Marcos to Aquino: Local Perspectives on Political Transition in the Philippines. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
Lacaba, Jose F., ed. 1995. Boss: 5 Case Studies of Local Politics in the Philippines. Metro Manila: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism and Institute for Popular Democracy.Google Scholar
Landé, Carl H. 1965. Leaders, Factions, and Parties: The Structure of Philippine Politics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
Landé, Carl H. 1969. “Brief History of Political Parties.” In Abueva, Jose and De Guzman, Raul, eds., Foundations and Dynamics of Filipino Government and Politics. Manila: Bookmark.Google Scholar
Leones, Errol B., and Moraleda, Miel. 1998. “Philippines.” In Sachsenröder, Wolfgang and Frings, Ulrike E., eds., Political Party Systems and Democratic Development in East and Southeast Asia, Volume I: Southeast Asia. Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Linz, Juan J. 1978. “Excursus on Presidential and Parliamentary Democracy.” In Linz, Juan J. and Stepan, Alfred, eds., The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Machado, K. G. 1974. “From Traditional Faction to Machine: Changing Patterns of Political Leadership and Organization in the Rural Philippines.” Journal of Asian Studies 33, No. 4 (August): 523–547.Google Scholar
May, Glenn Anthony. 1984 [1980]. Social Engineering in the Philippines: The Aims, Execution, and Impact of American Colonial Policy, 1900–1913. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.Google Scholar
McCoy, Alfred W. 1989. “Quezon's Commonwealth: The Emergence of Philippine Authoritarianism.” In Paredes, Ruby R., ed., Philippine Colonial Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies, Monograph No. 32.Google Scholar
McCoy, Alfred W. 1999. Closer Than Brothers: Manhood at the Philippine Military Academy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McCoy, Alfred W., ed. 1993. An Anarchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines. Madison, WI: Center for Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
Mijares, Primitivo. 1986 [1976]. The Conjugal Dictatorship of Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos I. San Francisco: Union Square Publications.Google Scholar
Montinola, Gabriella R. 1999. “Parties and Accountability in the Philippines.” Journal of Democracy 10: 126–140.Google Scholar
Paredes, Ruby R. 1989. “The Origins of National Politics: Taft and the Partido Federal.” In Paredes, R. R., ed., Philippine Colonial Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Southeast Asia Studies.Google Scholar
Recto, Claro M. 1953 [1971]. “The Political Philosophy of Manuel L. Quezon.” A speech delivered on the seventy-fifth birthday anniversary of President Quezon, August 19, 1953, reprinted as an appendix to Quirino, Carlos, ed., Quezon: Paladin of Philippine Freedom, pp. 391–403. Manila: Filipiana Book Guild, 1971.Google Scholar
Rivera, Temario C. 2002. “Transition Pathways and Democratic Consolidation in the Post-Marcos Philippines.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the Philippine Political Science Association, Cebu City, November 8–9.Google Scholar
Rocamora, Joel. 1995. “The Political Requirements of Economic Reform,” Issues and Letters 4 (October): 1–4.Google Scholar
Rocamora, Joel. 2003a. “How to Be Rizal Without Really Dying.” Newsbreak 3, No. 2 (February 3): 35.Google Scholar
Rocamora, Joel. 2003b. “The Constituent Assembly Is Dead: Elect Concon Delegates in 2004.” Philippine Daily Inquirer, January 25.Google Scholar
Rood, Steven. 2002. “Elections as Complicated and Important Events in the Philippines.” In Hsieh, John Fuh-Sheng and Newman, David, eds., How Asia Votes. New York: Chatham House Publishers.Google Scholar
Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, Stephens, Evelyne Huber, and Stephens, John D. 1992. Capitalist Development and Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Salamanca, Bonifacio. 1984 [1968]. The Filipino Reaction to American Rule, 1901–1913. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.Google Scholar
Shalom, Stephen Rosskamm. 1986. The United States and the Philippines: A Study of Neocolonialism. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.Google Scholar
Shantz, Arthur Alan. 1972. “Political Parties: The Changing Foundations of Philippine Democracy.” Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Shefter, Martin. 1994. Political Parties and the State: The American Historical Experience. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sidel, John Thayer. 1999. Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Silliman, , Sidney, G., and Noble, Lela Garner, eds. 1998. NGOs, Civil Society, and the Philippine State: Organizing for Democracy. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.Google Scholar
Stanley, Peter W. 1974. A Nation in the Making: The Philippines and the United States, 1899–1921. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Steinberg, David Joel. 1967. Philippine Collaboration in World War II. Manila: Solidaridad Publishing House.Google Scholar
Steinberg, David Joel. 2000. The Philippines: A Singular and a Plural Place, 4th ed. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
Stepan, Alfred, and Skach, Cindy. 1993. “Constitutional Frameworks and Democratic Consolidation: Parliamentarism Versus Presidentialism.” World Politics (October): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tancangco, Luzviminda. 1988. “The Electoral System and Political Parties in the Philippines.” In De Guzman, R. and Reforma, M., eds., Government and Politics in the Philippines. Singapore: Oxford University Press, pp. 77–112.Google Scholar
Thompson, Mark R. 1995. The Anti-Marcos Struggle: Personalistic Rule and Democratic Transition in the Philippines. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Velasco, Djorina, and Rodriguez, Agustin Martin G. 1998. Democracy Rising? The Trials and Triumphs of the 1998 Party List Elections. Manila: Institute of Politics and Governance.Google Scholar
Weekley, Kathleen. 2000. “What Kind of Populism Is That? The Politics of the Estrada Presidency.” Paper presented to the annual meetings of the Association for Asian Studies, San Diego, California, March 9–12.Google Scholar
Wurfel, David. 1988. Filipino Politics: Development and Decay. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar