Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Tables
- List of Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction: Rethinking Party System Institutionalization in Asia
- 2 The Antidemocratic Potential of Party System Institutionalization: Malaysia as Morality Tale?
- 3 Institutionalized Succession and Hegemonic Party Cohesion in Singapore
- 4 Party System Institutionalization in Japan
- 5 Long in the Making: Taiwan’s Institutionalized Party System
- 6 The Making and Unmaking of the Communist Party and Single-Party System of Vietnam
- 7 The Institutionalization of the Communist Party and the Party System in China
- 8 Party System Institutionalization in India
- 9 Party and Party System Institutionalization in Cambodia
- 10 Explaining Party System Institutionalization in Indonesia
- 11 South Korea’s Weakly Institutionalized Party System
- 12 Thailand’s Feckless Parties and Party System: A Path-Dependent Analysis
- 13 Party and Party System Institutionalization in the Philippines
- 14 Party System Institutionalization: Reflections Based on the Asian Cases
- Index
- References
13 - Party and Party System Institutionalization in the Philippines
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2014
By
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- List of Figures
- List of Tables
- List of Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Introduction: Rethinking Party System Institutionalization in Asia
- 2 The Antidemocratic Potential of Party System Institutionalization: Malaysia as Morality Tale?
- 3 Institutionalized Succession and Hegemonic Party Cohesion in Singapore
- 4 Party System Institutionalization in Japan
- 5 Long in the Making: Taiwan’s Institutionalized Party System
- 6 The Making and Unmaking of the Communist Party and Single-Party System of Vietnam
- 7 The Institutionalization of the Communist Party and the Party System in China
- 8 Party System Institutionalization in India
- 9 Party and Party System Institutionalization in Cambodia
- 10 Explaining Party System Institutionalization in Indonesia
- 11 South Korea’s Weakly Institutionalized Party System
- 12 Thailand’s Feckless Parties and Party System: A Path-Dependent Analysis
- 13 Party and Party System Institutionalization in the Philippines
- 14 Party System Institutionalization: Reflections Based on the Asian Cases
- Index
- References
Summary
No country in Asia has a longer experience with democracy and democratic institutions than does the Philippines. The first national political party, Partido Federal, was founded in 1900. Direct local elections were held under U.S. colonial auspices in 1906 followed by national legislative elections in 1907. And yet, despite its long history the Philippine party system remains stubbornly under-institutionalized – regardless of how we choose to define and operationalize the concept. The chronic weaknesses of the party system are the source of a variety of ills, according to scholars, including an acute “democratic deficit,” a lack of political accountability, an under-provision of public goods, and disillusionment with democracy among Filipino citizens. In short, the party system is one of the biggest obstacles to democratic stability and good governance in the Philippines.
In this chapter, I examine characteristics and causal factors related to the Philippine party system. Using Mainwaring and Scully’s institutionalization framework as a point of departure, I first demonstrate that the Philippines is indeed under-institutionalized (inchoate). I note and discuss apparent changes in the degree of institutionalization over time. Finally, I present an explanation for why the party system has developed as it has in the Philippines, an explanation that also accounts for the changes we observe over time. Specifically, like Hutchroft and Rocomora (2003), I argue that the development of the Philippine party system is inextricably linked to the manner in which democracy unfolded in the Philippines. Early decisions by colonial administrators and Philippine elite had the unintended consequence of entrenching a particular style of political party that has dominated the Philippine polity ever since. I argue that when the question of institutional reform has arisen in the decades since, the Filipino elite has consistently and sometimes strategically opted for institutions that were inimical to greater party institutionalization.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Party System Institutionalization in AsiaDemocracies, Autocracies, and the Shadows of the Past, pp. 307 - 327Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
. 1988. Cacique Democracy in the Philippines: Origins and Dreams. New Left Review 169: 3–33.Google Scholar
, and . 1996. Political Parties in the Philippines: From 1900 to the Present. Makati: Konrad Adenauer Foundation.Google Scholar
. 2008. Bound to Rule: Party Institutions and Regime Trajectories in Malaysia and the Philippines. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 8(1): 89–118.Google Scholar
1997. Dynamics of Political Parties in the Philippines. Makati: Konrad Adenauer Foundation.Google Scholar
. 2001. Philippine Democracies Old and New: Elections, Term Limits, and Party Systems. Asian Survey 41: 488–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1992. Report of the Commission on Elections to the President and Congress of the Republic of the Philippines on the Conduct of the Synchronized National and Local Elections of May 11, 1992. Manila: Commission on Elections.Google Scholar
. 1995. Report of the Commission on Elections to His Excellency President Fidel V. Ramos and to Congress of the Republic of the Philippines on the Conduct of the National and Local Elections of May 8, 1992. Manila: Commission on Elections.Google Scholar
. 1998. Election Results from the 1998 National and Local Elections. Data on Diskette. Manila: Commission on Elections.Google Scholar
. 2001. Election Results from the 2001 National and Local Elections. .
. 2004. Election Results from the 2004 National and Local Elections. .
. 1992. Money and Moguls: Oiling the Campaign Machinery. In and (Eds.), 1992 & Beyond: Forces and Issues in Philippine Elections, pp. 36–78. Quezon City: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism and Ateneo Center for Social Policy and Public Affairs.Google Scholar
, and . 2007. The Effect of Dictatorships on Party Systems in Latin America. Unpublished manuscript, UCLA.
. 1964. Politics in the Philippines: A Country Study. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
, , and 2001. Philippines. In et al. (Eds.), Elections in Asia and the Pacific: A Data Handbook. Volume II South East Asia, East, pp. 185–238. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1992. Marcos, His Cronies and the Philippines Failure to Develop. In (Ed.), Southeast Asian Capitalists, pp. 145–160. Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program.Google Scholar
. 2008a. The Politics of Economic Recovery in Thailand and the Philippines. In , , and (Eds.), Crisis as Catalyst Asia’s Dynamic Political Economy, pp. 206–230. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
. 2008b. Political Engineering and Party Regulation in Southeast Asia. In et al. (Eds.), Political Parties in Conflict-Prone Societies: Regulation, Engineering and Democratic Development, pp. 69–94. New York: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
. 2009. Building Party Systems in Developing Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Political Parties and Party Systems in Southeast Asia. In and (Eds.), The Crisis of Democratic Governance in Southeast Asia,pp. 151–170. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
, and . 2011. Reexamining Party Institutionalization through Asian Lenses. Comparative Political Studies 44(5): 572–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. Booty Capitalism: The Politics of Banking in the Philippines. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
2000. Colonial Masters, National Politicos, and Provincial Lords: Central Authority and Local Autonomy in the American Philippines, 1900–1913. Journal of Asian Studies 59(2): 277–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2003. Strong Demands and Weak Institutions: The Origins and Evolution of the Democratic Deficit in the Philippines. Journal of East Asian Studies 3(2): 259–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2001. Presidential Connection: Parties and Party Systems in the Philippines. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, Chicago, March 23–25.
1965. Leaders, Factions, and Parties. New Haven: Southeast Asian Studies, Yale University.Google Scholar
1996. Post-Marcos Politics: A Geographic and Statistical Analysis of the 1992 Philippine Elections. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
. 1998. Institutionalization and Peronism: The Concept, The Case and the Case for Unpacking the Concept. Party Politics 4(1): 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1970. Philippine Parties and Politics: A Historical Study of National Experience in Democracy. San Francisco: The Gladstone Company.Google Scholar
, , and . 1993. Separation of Powers and Cleavage Management. In and (Eds.), Do Institutions Matter: Government in the United States and Abroad, pp. 302–344. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
, and . 1995. Introduction. In and (Eds.), Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, pp. 1–36. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
, and . 2006. Party System Institutionalization and Party System Theory after the Third Wave of Democratization. In and (Eds.), Handbook of Political Parties, pp. 204–227. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2007. Historical Sequences and the Stabilization of Interparty Competition: Electoral Volatility in Old and New Democracies. Party Politics 13(2): 155–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Parties and Accountability in the Philippines. Journal of Democracy 10(1): 126–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1988. Political Parties: Organization and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1993. Democratisation and Clan Politics: The 1992 Philippine Elections. Mimeo.
1940. Addresses of His Excellency Manuel L. Quezon on the Theory of a Partyless Democracy. Manila: Bureau of Print.Google Scholar
. 2005. Yellow Pad: Trapo Parties and Corruption. BusinessWorld, October 10, page S1/5. Accessed at .Google Scholar
, and ,. 2002. Party Institutionalization in New Democracies. Party Politics 8(1): 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2010. Presidents, Parties, Prime Ministers: How the Separation of Powers Affects Party Organization and Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Political Parties and the State: The American Historical Experience. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
. 1999. Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, and Provision of Public Goods in Less-Developed Countries. Constitutional Political Economy 10(1): 53–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1973. The “Fair Hope of the Fatherland.”Philippine Journal of Public Administration 17 (October): 437.Google Scholar
1996. Capital Coercion and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. Iron Cage in an Iron Fist: Authoritarian Institutions and the Personalization of Power in Malaysia. Comparative Politics 36(1): 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Attitudes towards Political Parties in the Philippines. A joint production of Social Weather Stations, Ateneo School of Government, with the Support of the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Available from . Accessed May 8, 2008.
. 2008. Political Party and Party System Institutionalization in Southeast Asia: Lessons for Democratic Consolidation in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. The Pacific Review 21(3): 327–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1973. Political Institutionalization: Comparative Analyses of African Party Systems. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications,Google Scholar
. 2001. .
- 10
- Cited by