PEOPLE'S STRUGGLE
Herman Tiu Laurel
10/15-21/2012
dy·nas·ty (dn-st) : n. pl. dy·nas·ties 1. A succession of rulers from the same family or line; 2. A family or group that maintains power for several generations: a political dynasty controlling the state. (FreeOnLine dictionary)
THE GOOD: The Lees form a political dynasty in Singapore, Hsien Loong the son took over from patriarch Lee Kwan Yew after a brief transition with Goh, while Mrs. Lee tended to the economic and financial affairs of the State. Despite the enviable success of the small country they managed to become a global powerhouse, there are Singapore critics of the Lee dynasty. Between the Good and the Bad are the controversial dynasties, such as Sukarnos in Indonesia, Tanakas in Japan, Kennedys in the U.S. Shinawatras in Thailand, Marcoses in the Philippines. The Bad and Ugly: a long list can be cited, from the controversial three generation rule of the Bush family in the U.S. marked by charges of war-for-profit to the most crude, retarded and oppressive Duvalier dynasty in Haiti.
Dynasties in electoral democracies are alternately called "democratic dynasties" to distinguish from the non-electoral dynasties. China has its modern form of the ancient dynasties, but instead of names like Shi, Tang or Qing dynasty there is the CPC dynasty (Communist Party of China) and its third generation inheritors today. "Princelings" of the revolutionary leadership led by Mao Tse Tung and the Five Immortals today rule China. A prime example of a democratic dynasty is the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty in India which controls the ruling party of India, the Congress Party which is now into its fourth generation. Democratic dynasties must also be distinguished from the outright feudal forms of dynasties as are prevalent in U.S.-British backed Middle Eastern states such as Saudi Arabia of the Saud Family, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, etc.
Antis, Pros and apathy
Democratic dynasty controversies abound in the world. Critics come mainly from the intelligentsia, the educated middle classes of the respective societies, agitating to contain such dynasties. Favoring undisturbed continuance of democratic dynasties are mainly the democratic dynasties themselves and/or the political parties they lead. Rural folks generally are apathetic to the issue. We can glean these impressions from observing Philippine society itself, but a statistical study is reported in an article Ronald U. Mendoza of the Asian Institute of Management, published in March of 2012 months before the current controversy over dynasties since the latest filing of certificates of candidacies in October that revealed a resurgence of political dynasties in Philippine politics.
Mendoza writes: "In varying degrees, political dynasties can exist in any democracy … Legislators and parliamentarians with dynastic links range from 6% in the United States to as high as 37–40% in the Philippines and Mexico. In the case of the Philippines, if we also consider familial links to local government units, the figure reaches an amazing 70%. Roughly 80% of the youngest legislators in the Philippines also hail from dynastic political families." Dynasty-ism is, based on this finding of Mendoza, actually the dominant mode of politics in the Philippines. It must be perceived as a real problem since the 1987 Constitutional Commission wrote into the basic law a ban on political dynasties.
Dynasties stonewall Constitution
Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution states: "The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.", but the legislature is dominated by members of political, democratic dynasties. Thus, for twenty-five years the political dynasty ban has languished as a mere principle. Backlash to the political dynasty trend grew as unprecedented two-member presence of families emerged in the Senate, with the Cayetanos, for example, and the 2013 senatorial saw prospects of two Enriles sitting in the Senate, two Estrada, while the scion of Angara also looms, the Aquinos field presidential nephew Bam Aquino, and the Singsons apportion provincial governorship and a congressional seat amongst its scions (including a convicted drug user). This trend is all over the country. The Constitutional anti-dynasty ban is doomed to oblivion as political dynasties in the legislature seem bound to grow in numbers and strength.
Democratic Ideals
The ideal of democracy is that of limiting concentration of political power and distribution of the exercise of such power to as many participating citizens as possible. The English Magna Carta of 1215 is seen as the root of modern democracy. The Magna Carta set out rules for rulers written by those to be governed, limiting the powers of rulers and guaranteeing liberties and rights to those governed. These rights later included the right to stand for election to office. Since that time, the modern democratic ideal has been to limit the powers of rulers and expand the powers of the citizenry and the right to be elected to participate in legislation and governance.
Does political dynasty-ism in the Philippines work against the democratic deals? It definitely does, here's one instance: as scions of political families monopolize the political party drafts at the expense, say of affirmative action to include Muslim senatorial candidates. The Philippine senate has not had a Muslim senator for several terms now. This in turn has destabilized our national government because of the absence of Muslim representation. If the ban on political dynasties is now enabled in law several seats would be left free that would allow political parties to consider other potential candidates and ensure more diversity in the composition of the Senate. The same can be true in the Lower House where dozens of seats would be freed for non-dynastic candidates to run for, and fill.
Pork Dynasties
A ban on political dynasties would also help in preventing the growing concentration of the "pork barrel" funds in many levels of governance, in the hands of fewer and fewer political families. A congressman gets P 70-million in pork annually or P 210-million in a three-year term, each senator is entitled to P 200-million in the same every year amounting to P 1.2-Billion in a six year term. Just imagine the amounts political families can accumulate if they have two or more scions in the Senate or the House, plus more in the national and local executive branches. Pork barrels are becoming standard privilege in local governments too, a Quezon City councilor gets P 42-Million annually in "pork". It must be noted that there was no "pork barrel" under Marcos, cory Aquino introduced that to Philippine politics.
The pork barrel of politicians is "rent-seeking", earned for producing no real goods or service, and only for holding a position. This is an important, if not more important, as the constitutional issue of political dynasties ban. The pork barrel is the stinking, rotten lure for the opportunistic to spend and win elections and control political positions; it distorts at the very onset the entire political and democratic electoral intention and process. Political dynasty-ism multiplies its ugly head if the pork barrel did not exist or were outlawed and corruption would be nipped in the bud. Jawant Singh, former Indian finance minister, on corruption: "The 'dynasticism' that has taken such a firm grip on much of Indian politics plays a large role in fostering corruption. … Preserving hereditary privileges invariably means that rules and governmental processes get bent, if not made wholly subservient to dynastic concerns…."
Dynasto-saurs and voters
India, grappling with the issue of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, is rich in studies of this issue. In "Dynasty and Democracy: Of Families, Modernization and Legitimacy" leading political columnist Karan Thapar writes: "First, political children have to win elections to get into the system…Second, for their party to survive dynastic leadership has to inspire voters or survive the long period of drought when the response is adverse…The advantage a dynasty confers on a political party could be substantial. Immediate recognition, mass appeal, a certain savoir-faire and a capacity to cement a party, bind its factions, resolve differences and provide a coherent central command-like control. Elected leaders, who can be challenged, often cannot deliver as much."
Contrarily, British writers Heather MacRobie write in "Dangers of 'dynastical democracy'… The negative effects of 'democratic dynasties' are obvious: a fossilisation of the elite decays democracy as well as social and economic mobility, fostering 'rent-seeking' behavior … But political discourse can deteriorate as names become more important than issues. …" My last word: voters choice are limited by Philippine political dynasties' monopolization of the party and political nominations. Voters are pre-empted from having a broader choice of candidates. Society has the right and the power to regulate the power wielders and the political process, the ban on political dynasties is an exercise of that but that constitutional provision, which is among this nation's democratic ideals, is doomed to sat upon until death by suffocation by the Dynasto-saurs in the Senate and Congress.
(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition channel 8, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., replay 11:15 p.m. and Sunday, and onwww.gnntv-asia.com: this week "People's Power Struggle"; tune to 1098AM radio Tues. To Fri. 5 to 6pmhttp://newkatipunan.blogspot.com)
THE GOOD: The Lees form a political dynasty in Singapore, Hsien Loong the son took over from patriarch Lee Kwan Yew after a brief transition with Goh, while Mrs. Lee tended to the economic and financial affairs of the State. Despite the enviable success of the small country they managed to become a global powerhouse, there are Singapore critics of the Lee dynasty. Between the Good and the Bad are the controversial dynasties, such as Sukarnos in Indonesia, Tanakas in Japan, Kennedys in the U.S. Shinawatras in Thailand, Marcoses in the Philippines. The Bad and Ugly: a long list can be cited, from the controversial three generation rule of the Bush family in the U.S. marked by charges of war-for-profit to the most crude, retarded and oppressive Duvalier dynasty in Haiti.
Dynasties in electoral democracies are alternately called "democratic dynasties" to distinguish from the non-electoral dynasties. China has its modern form of the ancient dynasties, but instead of names like Shi, Tang or Qing dynasty there is the CPC dynasty (Communist Party of China) and its third generation inheritors today. "Princelings" of the revolutionary leadership led by Mao Tse Tung and the Five Immortals today rule China. A prime example of a democratic dynasty is the Gandhi-Nehru dynasty in India which controls the ruling party of India, the Congress Party which is now into its fourth generation. Democratic dynasties must also be distinguished from the outright feudal forms of dynasties as are prevalent in U.S.-British backed Middle Eastern states such as Saudi Arabia of the Saud Family, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, etc.
Antis, Pros and apathy
Democratic dynasty controversies abound in the world. Critics come mainly from the intelligentsia, the educated middle classes of the respective societies, agitating to contain such dynasties. Favoring undisturbed continuance of democratic dynasties are mainly the democratic dynasties themselves and/or the political parties they lead. Rural folks generally are apathetic to the issue. We can glean these impressions from observing Philippine society itself, but a statistical study is reported in an article Ronald U. Mendoza of the Asian Institute of Management, published in March of 2012 months before the current controversy over dynasties since the latest filing of certificates of candidacies in October that revealed a resurgence of political dynasties in Philippine politics.
Mendoza writes: "In varying degrees, political dynasties can exist in any democracy … Legislators and parliamentarians with dynastic links range from 6% in the United States to as high as 37–40% in the Philippines and Mexico. In the case of the Philippines, if we also consider familial links to local government units, the figure reaches an amazing 70%. Roughly 80% of the youngest legislators in the Philippines also hail from dynastic political families." Dynasty-ism is, based on this finding of Mendoza, actually the dominant mode of politics in the Philippines. It must be perceived as a real problem since the 1987 Constitutional Commission wrote into the basic law a ban on political dynasties.
Dynasties stonewall Constitution
Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution states: "The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.", but the legislature is dominated by members of political, democratic dynasties. Thus, for twenty-five years the political dynasty ban has languished as a mere principle. Backlash to the political dynasty trend grew as unprecedented two-member presence of families emerged in the Senate, with the Cayetanos, for example, and the 2013 senatorial saw prospects of two Enriles sitting in the Senate, two Estrada, while the scion of Angara also looms, the Aquinos field presidential nephew Bam Aquino, and the Singsons apportion provincial governorship and a congressional seat amongst its scions (including a convicted drug user). This trend is all over the country. The Constitutional anti-dynasty ban is doomed to oblivion as political dynasties in the legislature seem bound to grow in numbers and strength.
Democratic Ideals
The ideal of democracy is that of limiting concentration of political power and distribution of the exercise of such power to as many participating citizens as possible. The English Magna Carta of 1215 is seen as the root of modern democracy. The Magna Carta set out rules for rulers written by those to be governed, limiting the powers of rulers and guaranteeing liberties and rights to those governed. These rights later included the right to stand for election to office. Since that time, the modern democratic ideal has been to limit the powers of rulers and expand the powers of the citizenry and the right to be elected to participate in legislation and governance.
Does political dynasty-ism in the Philippines work against the democratic deals? It definitely does, here's one instance: as scions of political families monopolize the political party drafts at the expense, say of affirmative action to include Muslim senatorial candidates. The Philippine senate has not had a Muslim senator for several terms now. This in turn has destabilized our national government because of the absence of Muslim representation. If the ban on political dynasties is now enabled in law several seats would be left free that would allow political parties to consider other potential candidates and ensure more diversity in the composition of the Senate. The same can be true in the Lower House where dozens of seats would be freed for non-dynastic candidates to run for, and fill.
Pork Dynasties
A ban on political dynasties would also help in preventing the growing concentration of the "pork barrel" funds in many levels of governance, in the hands of fewer and fewer political families. A congressman gets P 70-million in pork annually or P 210-million in a three-year term, each senator is entitled to P 200-million in the same every year amounting to P 1.2-Billion in a six year term. Just imagine the amounts political families can accumulate if they have two or more scions in the Senate or the House, plus more in the national and local executive branches. Pork barrels are becoming standard privilege in local governments too, a Quezon City councilor gets P 42-Million annually in "pork". It must be noted that there was no "pork barrel" under Marcos, cory Aquino introduced that to Philippine politics.
The pork barrel of politicians is "rent-seeking", earned for producing no real goods or service, and only for holding a position. This is an important, if not more important, as the constitutional issue of political dynasties ban. The pork barrel is the stinking, rotten lure for the opportunistic to spend and win elections and control political positions; it distorts at the very onset the entire political and democratic electoral intention and process. Political dynasty-ism multiplies its ugly head if the pork barrel did not exist or were outlawed and corruption would be nipped in the bud. Jawant Singh, former Indian finance minister, on corruption: "The 'dynasticism' that has taken such a firm grip on much of Indian politics plays a large role in fostering corruption. … Preserving hereditary privileges invariably means that rules and governmental processes get bent, if not made wholly subservient to dynastic concerns…."
Dynasto-saurs and voters
India, grappling with the issue of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, is rich in studies of this issue. In "Dynasty and Democracy: Of Families, Modernization and Legitimacy" leading political columnist Karan Thapar writes: "First, political children have to win elections to get into the system…Second, for their party to survive dynastic leadership has to inspire voters or survive the long period of drought when the response is adverse…The advantage a dynasty confers on a political party could be substantial. Immediate recognition, mass appeal, a certain savoir-faire and a capacity to cement a party, bind its factions, resolve differences and provide a coherent central command-like control. Elected leaders, who can be challenged, often cannot deliver as much."
Contrarily, British writers Heather MacRobie write in "Dangers of 'dynastical democracy'… The negative effects of 'democratic dynasties' are obvious: a fossilisation of the elite decays democracy as well as social and economic mobility, fostering 'rent-seeking' behavior … But political discourse can deteriorate as names become more important than issues. …" My last word: voters choice are limited by Philippine political dynasties' monopolization of the party and political nominations. Voters are pre-empted from having a broader choice of candidates. Society has the right and the power to regulate the power wielders and the political process, the ban on political dynasties is an exercise of that but that constitutional provision, which is among this nation's democratic ideals, is doomed to sat upon until death by suffocation by the Dynasto-saurs in the Senate and Congress.
(Watch Destiny Cable GNN's HTL edition channel 8, Saturdays, 8:15 to 9 p.m., replay 11:15 p.m. and Sunday, and onwww.gnntv-asia.com: this week "People's Power Struggle"; tune to 1098AM radio Tues. To Fri. 5 to 6pmhttp://newkatipunan.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment
REMINDERS:
- Spamming is STRICTLY PROHIBITED
- Any other concerns other than the related article should be sent to generalkuno@gmail.com. Your privacy is guaranteed 100%.