Between Radical Politics and Dutertismo: A Reply to Critics. Social Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy. Volume 5, Number 1 (2019): 1-18. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Lectio: A Graduate Journal of Philosophy, 2021
This study attempts to deliver a means of understanding post-colonial politics in the country. Politics in the Philippines is "contested". The liberal slant in finding solutions in the state cannot overcome the reality of uneven powerrelations. Deliberation, anchored in a Manila-centric model of governance, offers no respite to the inevitability of conflict and antagonism post-EDSA I. The paper draws from the radical approach of President Duterte. Using it as a vantage point provides us with contrasts between concepts (e.g. populism and elitism). This study intends to understand what Philippine democracy is about. It will be accomplished by comparing the paths and struggles of two men-the anthropologist Karl Gaspar and President Duterte. The theological struggle to liberate the Lumads from bondage in which Gaspar has found the profound meaning of his faith mission is correlated to the radical struggle in which Duterte has built his difficult political role.
In this paper, I examine the radical approach to politics of President Rodrigo Duterte. I will retrace the roots of this radicalism to the colonial history of the Philippines in which the Spanish regime has established an elitist democratic system that engendered a social divide that has made the people of Mindanao felt betrayed by the capital. The politics of exclusion also gave rise to terrorism in the southern part of the country, the latest incident of which was the crisis in Marawi that has left the city devastated to the ground. Political analysts have been critical of the ‘War on Drugs’. However, Duterte stays popular due to his progressive approach to governance. Previous administrations have been accused as lacking the political will to disturb the elite. Duterte, in contrast, has the character of a leader who is not afraid to institute change in Philippine society.
" A Moment in Philippine Political Time: Conceptions Towards Duterte's Approach
The Philippines has recently come up in several research data as the most socially engaged nation online. This distinction is currently more pronounced in the practice of online activism by Filipinos the world over. Since the campaign period for the May 2016 national elections, Duterte's perceived brutish personality as well as unorthodox approach towards the drug problem and criminality in the country has become a favorite theme on the social media of perpetually online Filipinos. This heated political debate does not only reflect a tech-savvy society but also a highly polarized citizenry that is divided on their views on Duterte's policies. Among Duterte's controversial moves is his aggressive " war on drugs " wherein he encourages the police force to " shoot-to-kill " (instead of shoot-to-disable) drug suspects if they show resistance to arresting officers (the Filipino verb for this kind of resistance is nanlaban, which has now become an infamous term in the country). Corollary to this move is his proclaimed aversion towards both local and international critics, including human rights groups, outspoken foreign officials, the EU, and the UN, among others. From a political anthropology lens, it is relevant in this case to problematize a number of obviously contrasting underlying conceptions at work on the notions on justice, violence, and sovereignty. As universal/international norms are discernibly being undermined and disparaged by Duterte's government and his supporters while asserting national sovereignty (not to mention an independent foreign policy), it is an academically interesting time to explore this Philippine state-citizen nexus by attempting, albeit the great complexity of the matter, to investigate local meanings, political subjectivities, and conceptions of the state, which are shaped by, and in turn, reshape the character of the nation-state. Necessarily, I observe facts vis-à-vis the state's official stand as well as that universal/international norms. I do this using theoretical frameworks that aid in making sense of how these conceptions are reconfiguring the Philippine state structure, and Philippine political society. I specifically draw insights from related overlapping fields of study such as references to key proponents such as Gupta, Bouchard, Mbembe, Weber and Acemoglu, and Nangengast, among others. Aside from my own inputs as a Filipino citizen, I also include the vantage point of several migrant Filipinos in Belgium who happen to be loyal Duterte supporters. Filipino diasporic citizens are ubiquitously engaged both online and offline as do the rest of Filipino netizens. I attempt to unveil cultural and historical undertones that may explain their current political stand and their conceptions of the state in terms of normative views on political violence and justice.
Two Faces of Dutertismo-Two Visions of Democracy in the Philippines.pdf
Social Ethics Society Journal of Applied Philosophy, 2018
In this paper, I present Randolf “Randy” David’s and Christopher Ryan Maboloc’s readings of President Duterte’s politics and leadership style. The former sees Duterte’s politics and leadership style as a form of authoritarianism while the latter views it as a form of radical politics. While their views can be brushed aside as grounded on their personal taste about the president, this does not do justice to their scholarship and personal integrity. In order to render a meaningful interpretation of their respective views, I propose to read their opposing analyses as two visions of democracy in the Philippines. David’s reading implicitly calls for political actors to stay within the democratic process, which succumbs to the vision of the ruling elite where any move to substantiate democracy must go through a process. On the other hand, Maboloc’s reading maintains that some “undemocratic ways” are important to shake the prevailing political order to move towards its substantive form.
2018
The advent of terrorism in the midst of political conflict requires an understanding of local context and history. Anti-establishment leaders like President Rodrigo Duterte expose the limits of liberalism. By applying the critical distinction between " politics " and the " political, " we can imagine an alternative framework in our desire to unravel the narrative of Duterte's communitarian style. Disruption is not simply meant to put into question the status quo. The goal of progressive leadership is to transform society in ways that will improve the difficult lives of the people. While the president's critics say that he is authoritarian, it will be argued that radical means are needed to overcome the failures of Philippine democracy.
South East Asian Journal of General Studies, 2020
The focus of this study is the radical politics of President Rodrigo Duterte. The leader has clashed with influential businessmen on critical issues. This investigation examines the president's battle against the oligarchy in the country. This research will try show that the rise to power of the first president from Mindanao is a reaction to elite rule. It seeks to reveal that the style of leadership of Duterte is reflective of the historical context that the critics of the president fail to account for. In arguing the case for Duterte's non-conventional approach in overhauling Philippine politics and society, the issues involving some conglomerates in the country are mentioned. In terms of method, the interpretive and analytical approach will be used, citing the available literature and documents to strengthen the article's arguments. The significance of this study has something to do with the idea of good governance. It argues that in the pursuit of a truly democratic society, the foundations of the basic structure must be strengthened. The pragmatic leadership of Duterte is a reflection of the deeper kind of radical change or substantive transformation that is needed to fight elite rule.
The rise to power of Rodrigo Duterte is perhaps one of the most astonishing political developments in our time. It is a radical revolution that is rooted in the language of dissent of the Bisaya. However, the critics of the president insist on the sociology of power as the real motive behind the man. Using Chantal Mouffe's theory of modern democracy, it will be argued that Duterte's radicalism is symptomatic of the political tensions in nation-states. Mouffe believes that the logic of identity in the modern state has disappeared. This approach to politics does not arise out of a consensus, but in the necessity of conflict and antagonism that characterizes the politics of nation-building in post-colonial Philippines. Drawing from the intent to pursue the Mindanao agenda, it is argued that critics misunderstand the nature of Duterte's radical politics.
2016
Since assuming the presidency, Rodrigo R. Duterte has "stuck to his guns" in carrying out his campaign pledge to launch a violent anti-drug campaign. Duterte's presidency was preceded by six years of political stability and high growth under the relatively liberal and supposedly reformist administration of President Benigno "Noynoy" S. Aquino, III. What did voters find so appealing about Duterte given that drugs and criminality were not a major national concern until he launched his candidacy? Unlike previous populist politicians in the post-Marcos Philippines, Duterte's strongest support did not come from the poorest voters but rather from the elite and the middle class who most feared for their personal security. Although Aquino was widely perceived to be personally honest, his administration had become "systemically disjunctive" and vulnerable to replacement by violent illiberalism because its narrative of "good governance" had been...
Mayor Duterte's Political Ideologies as a Strategy: Prelude to being a President
Rodrigo Roa Duterte, former Davao City Mayor and elected as the current and 16th President of the Philippines, has always been a self-proclaimed leftist and socialist in his entire years of being a political leader. Socialism and his left-wing political views greatly influenced his strategy in dealing with the affairs of the city he ruled for more than twenty years. Now as the Head of State, he remains to have the same set of political ideologies that shape his actions and decisions concerning the Filipino people under his administration. The purpose of this research is to shed light to people all over the world as to why the current Philippine President has an unconventional strategy in administering all matters of the entire Filipino nation. This research aims to provide better and clearer understanding on how Mr. Duterte's political ideologies affected his tactics and approaches in his political career during his rule as a Mayor of Davao City, and now as the Philippine Supreme Leader. The aspects explored in this research paper are the socialist and leftist sides of Mr. Duterte as a political leader, his way of governance as a mayor, his early presidency, as well as an analysis on his political standpoint on certain issues with regards to his position and ideologies. Through data analysis of documentary videos and written report, the research team was able to assess former Mayor Duterte's political ideologies used as a strategy, and provide answers on why and how he was able to continue his socialist and leftist views in managing a whole country. Ultimately, the very essence of this research is to enlighten everyone on what could be in store for Filipinos during President Duterte's six-year term, since this paper provides facts and evaluation on his previous and current rule.