Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

H113 Review, Finals coverage, Scope/Subject, Analytic Method, Sources used…

- - - - elite democratic political system
        
        Presidential system (three branches: executive, legislative, judiciary)
      - developing country/"modern state"
      - At present, we follow the 1987 Constitution
    - - Western experience of the historical emergence of the state
        
        Treaty of Westphalia 1648: Emergence of the concept of sovereignty (theoretically, only the ruler of a territory can determine the policies within that space)
        
        18th - 19th centuries in Europe: Modern states begin to emerge (well developed bureaucracies, professional militaries, avenues for diplomatic negotiation with other states)
        
        Creation of the United States late 18th century: Represented a more modern form of state politics. Their experiences were important in defining what modern democracy meant ("democracy of the people, by the people, for the people"). By the late 19th century, they were considered to be the more developed version of a modern democratic nation state
        
        1918: Influential Political Theorist Max Weber defined a modern state as one that has established legitimacy of rule and control over its territory and its population
        
        How do we define modern states in the present by international convention?
        
        1933: Montevideo Convention
        
        population
        
        territory
        
        functional government: capacity to rule
        
        acknowledged legally by the international community of states
        
        1945: United Nations: has become a body that helps determine what the status of different nation states is in the more contemporary period
    - - Nation is the people who are ruled or represented by rulers who share a common identity, history, and often territory
- - - - Galleon Trade (1565 - 1770s)
        
        Territory called the 'Philippines'
        
        System of rule connected to the Spanish global empire
        
        participation of the indio principalia in ruling the smallest units (barrios and pueblos)
        
        Gov instis
        
        legitimacy
        
        Christianization: Under the concept of just warfare in the medieval christian doctrine, new territories could be acquired for the sake of spreading the christian mission of saving new souls from hell
      - Reform Period (1770s - 1880s)
        
        Ordinances of good government in the 17th century
        
        Small scale elections for cabeza de barangay and gobernadorcillos
        
        attempts to create a more efficient taxation system (cedula personal and cedula industrial)
        
        creation of the police force: guardia civil
        
        attempts to professionalize the bureaucracy (everyday arms of government)
    - - They come to the philippines to use it as a laboratory for grafting on a democratic system of rule. Most of our modern characteristics of government come from this period
      - Democratic presidential system with three branches of governement. Philippines became an elite democracy
      - legitimacy
        
        "Legal" turnover of the Philippines from Spain through the 1898 Treaty of Paris by virtue of their surrender to the Americans
        
        Americans defeated the Philippine Malolos Republic (1902 through the capture of Aguinaldo)
        
        White man's burden and benevolent assimilation 1899
        
        social engineering and suprressed nationalism
        
        public education as a way to gain the trust of filipinos and tie their history to the americans by justifying colonization (bureau of education)
        
        supressed nationalism
        
        Brigandage Act: All revolutionaries who continued to fight were labeled as criminals instead of revolutionaries
        
        Flag Law: Illegal to fly Philippine flag or any revolutionary flag
        
        Philippine Constabulary: de facto philippine military
        
        Sedition Law: Anyone who mentions independence would be considered a traitor and could be imprisoned
        
        Reconcentration Policy: Villages who supported revolutionaries were relocated and heavily monitored
        
        By 1916, there were no major revolts against the americans and the policy of Filipinization in the government had begun
        
        Training for filipino elites to rule
        
        municipal and provincial elites hold the first elections in 1902
        
        1907 first legislative elections: FIlipinos were now part of the lower house of the Philippine lawmaking body
        
        1916: FIlipinos were now part of the upper house and the lower house
        
        1935: Filipinos were now part of the national executive positions (presidential and vice presidential)
      - System connected to the American President and Congress
      - Laws and government structure
        
        Laws
        
        1902 Organic Act
        
        1916 Jones Law
        
        1935 Commonwealth Constitution
        
        Government structure
        
        Global structure of governance
        
        American Congress: Decided on budget for the Philippines and determined the Governor General
        
        American Gov Gen in the Philippines
        
        Philippine Commission: Advisory body that initially served as the lawmaking body of the Ph (would later be replaced by the Philippine Assembly in 1916)
        
        Philippine legislative
        
        Provincial and Municipal governors
        
        Bureaus: Departments of government (e.g. Public Instruction/Education, Non-Christian Tribes)
        
        Two systems of rule until 1916
        
        civilian rule in most of the Philippines: local elections for filipinos could take place
        
        military rule in the moro province and mountain province (present day cordilleras), military had more control over policies here
    - - Nation's first government
- - - - How do you capture offices in the Philippine executive? Dominant theory is Patron Client Factionalist (PCF) framework
        
        Political Parties: typically represent constellations of political alliances rather than specific sectoral interests and policies
        
        Strategies to gain more votes across different regions of the Philippines when you're running for national office
        
        Before the 1970s, political parties tended to commit to the following strategies
        
        Senatorial candidates on a slate must represent biggest regions in the country
        
        Standard bearers (President and Vice President) are traditionally from the North and South
        
        Public works, pork barrel funds, and patronage are distributed more or less equitably among congressional districts and provinces to maintain alliances
        
        Clientelism and Political Machines
        
        Patron-client relationships: A network of alliances between national politicians (+ national political parties) and grassroots politicians (barrio leaders, town politicians, provincial politicians) (Lande, 1968)
        
        Building alliances with provincial political factions is important because they tend to be relatively stable as they are often built on blood-ties and intergenerational alliances
        
        Friendship, gratitude, or strategy (Lande, p. 91) affect the realignment of provincial factions to national politicians
        
        An effective political machine connects grassroots politicians and people of local influence to national politicians to deliver VOTES in exchange for PATRONAGE
        
        Local/provincial factions are built through kinship ties between elite and non-elite in localities (whether fictive via compadres or non-fictive through actual family ties)
        
        CLIENELISM: relationship in which "in which an individual of higher socio-economic status (patron) uses his own influence and resources to provide protection or benefits, or both, for a person of lower status (client) who, for his part, reciprocates by offering generous support and assistance, including personal service, to the patron." Scott, 1978 in Teehankee, 2012
        
        Historical evolution of political parties
        
        Pre-1972, a two-party system (despite the number of actual parties, two tend to battle it out for the main positions)
        
        American era: Partido Democrata and Partido Nacionalista
        
        Postwar: Partido Nacionalista and Liberal Party
        
        Under Marcos years, one-party rule under Kilusang Bagong Lipunan (KBL), dominant in 1978 interim elections
        
        Multi-party system following EDSA I
        
        Why is there " system of identical parties" where policies and programs of major parties are often indistinguishable (Lande, p. 92)?
        
        Alliances that deliver concrete patronage to individual local interests through funding and building relationships > Catering to general sectoral issues and general policy interests
        
        Politicians as "General Benefactors": This politician has been kind to me and my family, giving us jobs and scholarships > This politician has passed policies protecting the general rights of workers
        
        Visible public works projects as rewards for voter's support in those specific districts
        
        Political sensitivity is attuned to dominant sector's individual needs rather than issue based policies because Philippine politics is mostly locally oriented. To win, the support of local politicians and their constituents is necessary, which is usually built through patronage networks and supporting them through national parties
        
        It makes it easier for them to absorb smaller parties vs parties who represent specific stances on certain issues
        
        Teehankee 2012, p 193: "the party system remained fluid and underdeveloped as these newly emergent parties failed to consolidate into large, mass-based national parties."
        
        an individual voter's allegiance is often to a politician (whether local, municipal, provincial, or national) rather than to a political party
      - "Anarchy of Families" explanation (McCoy, 2009)
        
        "Since the state has proven “ineffective” in its economic regulation, one analyst argues that “the actual path of growth emerged from the economic and political behaviour of the most powerful families, which had been accumulating capital for several generations.” 2009, p. xi
        
        To understand the political development of the Philippines, look at the history of national oligarchs, vested interest groups specifically dominant clans, families, kinship networks who often have been consolidating and reconsolidating since 1907
        
        Rent-seeking: "Simply put, rents—restrictive state licenses that allow holders to gain a monopoly or oligopoly over a particular market—have served to strengthen a few fortunate families at the expense of both economic growth and government revenues." McCoy, 2009, xii
        
        state's licensing power as bargaining chips for votes (and funding campaign support) from the grassroots elite
        
        Crony capitalism: Major restructuration of national economic elite happens under Marcos regime
        
        The philippines has a weak state and strong oligarchs
      - Transformismo (Sidel and Hedman, 2009) - assigned reading
        
        "transformism involves a political process ‘whereby radical pressures are gradually absorbed and inverted by conservative forces, until they serve the opposite of their original ends’." p 13
        
        Three cases, 1953, 1969 and 1986 elections where we find the "emergence of previously excluded, unincorporated, or marginal social sectors – peasants, students and workers, and urban middle class elements – acting collectively to press their political demands" p 18
  - - - Commonwealth Republic (1935 - 1946)
      - Philippines under Japan (Jose P. Laurel) (1941 - 1945)
- - - - First way: by using the colonial past as a source of civilization (colonial history) (has colonial bias) (contains colonial propaganda)
      - Second way: pro-Asian 'nationalist'. Forget the colonial past or remember it as purely destructive. (has national bias, contains national propaganda). need to justify existence of the state as a coherent entitly even if there were people who did not fit neatly into the state. Histories that did not fall into this narrative were not written about or misrepresented.
      - Third way: is to release ourselves from the obsession with justifying empire or justifying nationhood and instead look at historical developments as they were. Use a different geographic scope: the region, and look for similarities (econ, pol, cultural, social) between areas - this is called Area Studies