Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 214 views

    UCSP Report

    Uploaded by

    Kyle Darren Punzalan
    Political dynasties in the Philippines typically originate from elite families after the establishment of the First Philippine Republic. Laws have attempted to limit political dynasties but with limited effect, as studies estimate that 40-70% of politicians are part of dynastic families. Political alliances between parties form coalition governments. Authority in societies evolved from bands and tribes with egalitarian structures, to chiefdoms with part-time leaders, and finally states with stratified social classes and centralized power under kings. Legitimacy of authority comes from tradition, charismatic leaders, or legal-rational systems based on principles rather than individuals.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    UCSP Report

    Uploaded by

    Kyle Darren Punzalan
    214 views31 pages
    Political dynasties in the Philippines typically originate from elite families after the establishment of the First Philippine Republic. Laws have attempted to limit political dynasties but with limited effect, as studies estimate that 40-70% of politicians are part of dynastic families. Political alliances between parties form coalition governments. Authority in societies evolved from bands and tribes with egalitarian structures, to chiefdoms with part-time leaders, and finally states with stratified social classes and centralized power under kings. Legitimacy of authority comes from tradition, charismatic leaders, or legal-rational systems based on principles rather than individuals.

    Original Title

    UCSP-Report

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Political dynasties in the Philippines typically originate from elite families after the establishment of the First Philippine Republic. Laws have attempted to limit political dynasties but with limited effect, as studies estimate that 40-70% of politicians are part of dynastic families. Political alliances between parties form coalition governments. Authority in societies evolved from bands and tribes with egalitarian structures, to chiefdoms with part-time leaders, and finally states with stratified social classes and centralized power under kings. Legitimacy of authority comes from tradition, charismatic leaders, or legal-rational systems based on principles rather than individuals.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    214 views31 pages

    UCSP Report

    Uploaded by

    Kyle Darren Punzalan
    Political dynasties in the Philippines typically originate from elite families after the establishment of the First Philippine Republic. Laws have attempted to limit political dynasties but with limited effect, as studies estimate that 40-70% of politicians are part of dynastic families. Political alliances between parties form coalition governments. Authority in societies evolved from bands and tribes with egalitarian structures, to chiefdoms with part-time leaders, and finally states with stratified social classes and centralized power under kings. Legitimacy of authority comes from tradition, charismatic leaders, or legal-rational systems based on principles rather than individuals.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 31

    POLITICS OF

    KINSHIP
    POLITICAL DYNASTY, ALLIANCES
    POLITICAL DYNASTIES
    IN THE PHILIPPINES
    • TYPICALLY FOUND IN ELITE FAMILIES
    • STARTED AFTER THE PHILIPPINE
    REVOLUTION WHEN THE FIRST
    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPPINES WAS
    ESTABLISHED
    • POLITICAL DYNASTIES - REFERS TO
    FAMILIES WHOSE MEMBERS ARE
    INVOLVED IN POLITICS
    • MEMBERS OF A FAMILY
    OCCUPY THE CERTAIN
    GOVERMENT POSITION IN
    EACH TERM
    • NUMBER OF FAMILY MEMBER
    OCCUPY A GOVERNMENT
    POSITION AT THE SAME TIME
    PHILIPPINE LAWS
    • THE 1978 CONSTITUTION OF THE
    PHILIPPINES STATES IN ARTICLE II
    SECTION 26
    • “THE STATE SHALL GUARANTEE
    EQUAL ACCESS TO
    OPPURTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC
    SERVICE, AND PROHIBIT
    POLITICAL DYNASTIES AS MAY
    BE DEFINED BY LAW”

    • REPUBLIC ACT 7160 (LOCAL


    GOVERNMENT CODE) BOOK 1, TITLE
    TWO, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 43
    • STATES THE TERM LIMIT OF
    ANY LOCAL GOVERMENT
    OFFICIAL BUT DOES NOT
    INCLUDE ANY LIMITATION IN
    TERMS OF FAMILY RELATIONS

    • ANTI-DYNASTY LAW
    POLITICAL DYNASTIES
    IN THE PHILIPPINES
    • 1995-2007 - AN AVERAGE OF 31.3% OF
    ALL CONGRESSMEN AND 23.1% OF
    GOVERNORS WERE REPLACED BY
    RELATIVES

    • 1995 ELECTIONS, 83 CONGRESSMEN


    ELECTED IN THE THIRD TERM ,36 OF
    THEM WERE REPLACED BY A RELEATIVE IN
    THE SUCCEEDING ELECTIONS

    • STUDY DONE IN 2012 BY BEJA, MENDOZA,


    VENIDA, AND YAP, ESTIMATED 40% OF ALL
    PROVINCIAL GOVERNOR AND
    CONGRESSMAN IN THE PHILIPPINES ARE
    RELATED IN SOME WAY

    • 2014 STUDY BY QUERUBIN OF THE


    DEPARTMENT OF POLITICS IN NEW YORK
    UNIVERSITIES, ESTIMATED 50 – 70% OF
    ALL POLITICIANS ARE INVOLVE IN
    POLITICAL DYNASTY
    THE “CARNEGIE EFFECT”
    CARNEGIE
    EFFECT
    • NAME AFTER ANDREW CARNEGIE
    • BASED ON CARNEGIE’S DECISION TO GIVE HIS WEALTH
    TO NON-FAMILY MEMBERS

    DYNASTIC POLITICIANS
    NEGATIVE POSITIVE
    • GENERALLY LOWER EDUCATION • HAVE STATISTICALLY
    THAT IS INVERSELY RELATED TO HIGHER PROBABILITY TO
    THEIR RANK IN THE POLITICAL WIN ELECTIONS
    DYNASTY • MORE LIKELY TO PURSUE
    • ECONOMIC INEQUALITIES DEVELOPMENTS
    • RESTRICTS SIGNIFICANCE CHANGE • RESPONSIBLE FOR
    IN THE SYSTEM
    INCREASE IN WOMEN’S
    POLITICAL PARTICIPATION
    POLITICAL ALLIANCE
    POLITICAL
    ALLIANCE • POLITCAL COALITION OR
    POLITICAL BLOC

    • AGREEMENT FOR COOPERATION


    BETWEEN DIFFERENT POLITICAL
    PARTIES ON COMMON
    POLITICAL AGENDA

    • INTEND TO MUTUALLY BENEFIT


    FROM THE ALLIANCE

    • COALITION GOVERNMENT –
    FORMED WHEN A POLITICAL
    ALLIANCE COMES TO POWER,
    OR WHEN PLURALITY HAS BEEN
    REACHED AND SEVERAL PARTIES
    MUST WORK TOGETHER TO
    GOVERN.
    POLITICAL LEADERSHIP AND STRUCTURE
    POLITICAL ORGANIZATION
    • POLITICAL INSTITUTION IS DEFINED AS THE
    SYSTEM OF NORMS, VALUES AND ROLES
    OF RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING
    SOCIAL ORDER IN THE SOCIETY

    1. CREATING FORMAL NORMS – HAS


    CREATED FORMAL NORM OR LAWS TO GUIDE OUR
    BEHAVIOR
    a) CONSTITUTIONAL LAWS – NORMS THAT EMERGE
    IN THE CONSTITUTION, THE WRITTEN PLAN OF ANY
    GOVERNMENT .

    b) STATUTORY LAWS – LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN ENACTED


    BY A LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE GOVERNMENT LIKE CONGRESS,
    AND CITY COUNCILS
    c) COMMON LAWS - UNWRITTEN LAWS BUILT OVER A
    CENTURY ON LOCAL CUSTOM
    POLITICAL ORGANIZATION
    2. APPLYING SANCTIONS – RESPONSIBILITY
    OF A POLITICAL INSTITUTION TO APPLY SANCTION
    TO THOSE WHO FAIL TO FOLLOW OR OBEY CERTAIN
    NORMS.

    3. SETTING DISPUTES AMONG INDIVIDUALS –


    ALSO ONE OF THE DUTIES OF POLITICAL INSTITUTION. YOU CAN SUE A
    FRIEND FOR EXAMPLE IF HE OR SHE HAS DONE SOMETHING WRONG
    TO YOU. IF YOU WON HE OR SHE MAY GO TO JAIL OR PAY THE
    PENALTY.

    4. SETTLING DISPUTES BETWEEN NATIONS –


    DONE TO EVADE NATION WARS.
    BANDS
    • OFTEN TIMES NOMADIC GROUP
    THAT IS CONNECTED BY FAMILY TIES
    AND IS POLITICALLY INDEPENDENT

    • ASSOCIATIONS OF FAMILY LIVING


    TOGETHER

    • ARE EXTREMELY EGALITARIAN

    • PRINCIPAL GOAL OF POLITICS IN


    MOST BANDS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT
    PEOPLE GET ALONG WITH EACH
    OTHER
    BANDS
    • SOCIAL VELOCITY (DEFINED BY
    RICHARD LEE) –MEMBERS DECIDE
    TO LEAVE BAND AND FORM THEIR
    OWN BAND

    • ETHNOGRAPHIC ACCOUNT –
    SUGGEST THAT THE POLITICAL
    POWER AND STATUS OF WOMEN
    IN MANY PEDESTRIAN FORAGING
    BANDS WAS SURPRISINGLY HIGH,
    ESPECIALLY COMPARED TO
    PASTORALIST AND AGRICLTURAL
    SOCIETIES
    TRIBES
    • KINSHIP TIES AND FRIENDSHIP
    ARE NO LONGER SUFFICIENT TO
    HOLD SOCIETY TOGETHER

    • PANTRIBAL ASSOCIATIONS –
    GROUPS THAT CROSS CUT A
    SOCIETY BY BRINGING TOGETHER
    A LIMITED NUMBER OF PEOPLE
    (ATLEAST ONE FROM EACH
    FAMILY)

    • TRIBES COMMONLY HAS VILLAGE


    HEADMEN WHO PERFORM
    LEADERSHIP ROLES, BUT THESE
    INDIVIDUALS HAVE RELATIVELY
    LIMITED AUTHORITY
    CHIEFDOMS
    • ARE SIMILAR TO BANDS AND TRIBES IN BEING MOSTLY
    CLASSLESS SOCIETIES. HOWEVER, CHIEFDOMS DIFFER IN
    HAVING A MORE OR LESS PERMANENT, FULLTIME LEADER
    WITH REAL AUTHORITY TO MAKE MAJOR DECISIONS FOR
    THEIR SOCIETIES.
    • SENIORITY IN KIN GROUPS IS USUALLY THE PRIMARY BASIS
    OF INDIVIDUAL STATUS WITHIN CHIEFDOMS.
    • CHIEFS AND THEIR FAMILIES GENERALLY HAVE A HIGHER
    STANDARD OF LIVING THAN ORDINARY PEOPLE.
    • THE LARGER POPULATION OF CHIEFDOMS GENERALLY
    MEANS THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE LESS IN COMMON THAN
    DO THOSE IN THE SMALLER SOCIETIES OF BANDS AND
    TRIBES.
    • WHEN THERE ARE DISPUTES THAT CANNOT BE SETTLES. A
    CHIEF USUALLY FUNCTIONS AS AN ARBITRATOR AND
    JUDGE IN THESE CASES.
    • AN IMPORTANT ADVANTAGE THAT CHIEFDOMS HAVE
    OVER BAND AND TRIBAL LEVEL SOCIETIES WHEN
    CONFLICTS ARISE BETWEEN THEM IS THAT CHIEFDOMS
    ARE USUALLY MORE EFFECTIVE IN WARFARE.
    • CHIEFDOMS CANNOT GO BACK TO A TRIBAL LEVEL UNLESS
    THEIR POPULATION DROPS SIGNIFICANTLY.
    STATES
    • STATE LEVEL POLITICAL SYSTEMS FIRST APPEARED IN
    SOCIETIES WITH LARGE-SCALE INTENSIVE AGRICULTURE.
    THEY BEGAN AS CHIEFDOMS AND THEN EVOLVED INTO
    MORE CENTRALIZED, AUTHORITARIAN KINGDOMS WHEN RULING
    THEIR POPULATIONS GREW INTO TENS OF THOUSANDS ELITE
    OF PEOPLE. HEADED BY HIGH
    • WHILE CHIEFDOMS ARE SOCIETIES IN WHICH EVERYONE
    A KING
    IS RANKED RELATIVE TO THE CHIEF, STATES ARE SOCIALLY
    STRATIFIED INTO LARGE DISTINCT CLASSES IN TERMS OF
    WEALTH, POWER, AND PRESTIGE. CRAFTSMEN, TRADERS POLITICAL
    • THESE POLITICAL SYSTEM HAD A PYMARID OF AND BUREAUCRATS POWERS
    AUTHORITY. AND
    • AS KINGDOMS BEGAN TO COMPETE FOR LAND, WATER, WEALTH
    AND OTHER RESOURCES, WARFARE BECAME MORE
    FREQUENT AND LARGER IN SCALE. THE POWERFUL
    KINGDOMS RULED OVER WEAKER ONES CREATING FARMERS (COMMONERS)
    SUPER-STATES WHICH REQUIRES EVEN MORE
    CENTRALIZATION OF AUTHORITY AND LARGER
    PERMANENT ARMIES.
    • MOST ANCIENT STATES HAD SLAVERY. BUT SLAVES WERE
    NOT ALWAYS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PYRAMID OF
    POWER IN THESE SOCIETIES.
    AUTHORITY AND
    LEGITIMACY
    AUTHORITY
    TYPES
    1. TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY
    - IS LEGITIMATED BY THE SANCTITY OF TRADITION. THE ABILITY AND RIGHT TO
    RULE IS PASSED DOWN, OFTEN THROUGH HEREDITY. IT DOES NOT CHANGE OVERTIME,
    DOES NOT FACILITATE SOCIAL CHANGE, TENDS TO BE IRRATIONAL AND INCONSISTENT AND
    PERPETUATES THE STATUS QUO.
    - TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY IS TYPICALLY EMBODIED IN FEUDALISM OR PATRIMONIALISM.
    - “THE SERVANTS ARE COMPLETELY AND PERSONALLY DEPENDENT UPON THE
    LORD.” (PATRIMONIALISM)
    - “THE SERVANTS ARE NOT PERSONAL SERVANTS OF THE LORD BUT
    INDEPENDENT MEN.” (FEUDALISM)
    2. CHARISMATIC AUTHORITY
    - IS FOUND IN A LEADER WHOSE MISSION AND
    VISION INSPIRE OTHERS. IT IS BASED UPON
    THE PERCEIVED EXTRAORDINARY
    CHARACTERISTICS OF AN INDIVIDUAL.
    - IS “ROUTINIZED” IN A NUMBER OF WAYS.
    ORDERS ARE TRADITIONALIZED, THE STAFF OR
    FOLLOWERS CHANGE INTO LEGAL OR “ESTATE-
    LIKE” STAFF, OR THE MEANING OF CHARISMA
    ITSELF MAY UNDERGO CHANGE.
    - IS OFTEN THE MOST LASTING OF REGIMES
    BECAUSE THE LEADER IS SEEN AS INFALLIBLE
    AND ANY ACTION AGAINST HIM WILL BE SEEN
    AS A CRIME AGAINST THE ESTATE.
    - CHARISMATIC LEADERS EVENTUALLY DEVELOP
    A CULT OF PERSONALITY OFTEN NO BY THEIR
    OWN DOING.
    3. LEGAL-RATIONAL AUTHORITY

    - IS EMPOWERED BY A FORMALISTIC BELIEF IN THE CONTENT OF THE LAW(LEGAL)


    OF NATURAL LAW(RATIONALITY). OBEDIENCE IS NO GIVEN TO A SPECIFIC
    INDIVIDUAL LEADER – WHETHER TRADITIONAL OR CHARISMATIC – BUT A SET OF
    UNIFORM PRINCIPLES.
    - THE BEST EXAMPLE OF LEGAL-RATIONAL AUTHORITY WAS A
    BERAEUCRACY(POLITICAL OF ECONOMIC).
    DIFFERENCE OF THE THREE
    AUTHORITY TYPES FROM
    ONE ANOTHER

    TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY IS IMPERSONAL AND


    NON-RATIONAL

    CHARISMATIC AUTHORITY IS DYNAMIC AND NON-


    RATIONAL

    LEGAL-RATIONAL AUTHORITY IS DYNAMIC AND


    IMPERSONAL
    LEGITIMIZATION

    • IN POLITICAL SCIENCE, “LEGITIMACY” IS THE POPULAR ACCEPTANCE OF AN


    AUTHORITY, USUALLY A GOVERNING LAW OR REGIME. WHEREAS “AUTHORITY”
    DENOTES A SPECIFIC POSITION IN AN ESTABLISHED GOVERNMENT, THE TERM
    “LEGITIMACY” DENOTES A SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT. POLITICAL LEGITIMACY
    IS CONSIDERED A BASIC CONDITION FOR GOVERNING, WITHOUT IT A
    GOVERNMENT WILL SUFFER LEGISLATIVE DEADLOCK(S) AND COLLAPSE.

    • IN MORAL PHILOSOPHY, THE TERM “LEGITIMACY” IS OFTEN POSITIVELY


    INTERPRETED AS THE NORMATIVE STATUS CONFERRED BY A GOVERNED
    PEOPLE UPON THEIR GOVERNORS’ INSTITUTIONS, OFFICES, AND ACTIONS,
    BASED UPON THE BELIEF THAT THEIR GOVERNMENT’S ACTIONS ARE
    APPROPRIATE USES OF POWER BY A LEGALLY CONSTITUTED GOVERNMENT.
    LEGITIMIZATION

    “LEGITIMACY IS THE FOUNDATION OF SUCH GOVERNMENTAL POWER AS IS


    EXERCISED, BOTH WITH A CONSCIOUSNESS ON THE GOVERNMENT’S PART
    THAT IT HAS A RIGHT TO GOVERN, AND WITH SOME RECOGNITION BY THE
    GOVERNED OF THAT RIGHT.” –DolfSternberger

    “LEGITIMACY INVOLVES THE CAPACITY OF A POLITICAL SYSTEM TO ENGENDER


    AND MAINTAIN THE BELIEF THAT EXISTING POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS ARE THE
    MOST APPROPRIATE AND PROPER ONES FOR THE SOCIETY.” –Seymour Martin
    Lipset

    “LEGITIMACY IS LIKE A RESERVOIR; SO LONG AS THE WATER IS AT A GIVEN


    LEVEL, POLITICAL STABILITY IS MAINTAINED. IF IT FALLS BELOW THE REQUIRED
    LEVEL, POLITICAL LEGITIMACY IS ENDANGERED. –Robert A. Dahl
    TYPES OF
    LEGITIMACY
    1. TRADITIONAL LEGITIMACY

    - DERIVES FROM SOCIETAL CUSTOMS AND HABITS THAT EMPHASIZE THE


    HISTORY OF AUTHORITY OF TRADITION.
    - TRADITIONALISTS UNDERSTAND THIS FORM OF RULE AS HISTORICALLY
    ACCEPTED, HENCE ITS CONTINUITY, BECAUSE IT IS THE WAY SOCIETY HAS
    ALWAYS BEEN.
    - THEREFORE, THE INSTITUTIONS OF TRADITIONAL GOVERNMENT USUALLY
    ARE HISTORICALLY CONTINUOUS, AS IN MONARCHY AND TRIBALISM.
    2. CHARISMATIC LEGITIMACY
    - DERIVES FROM THE IDEAS AND PERSONAL CHARISMA OF THE LEADER, A
    PERSON WHOSE AUTHORITATIVE PERSONA CHARMS AND
    PSYCHOLOGICALLY DOMINATES THE PEOPLE OF THE SOCIETY TO
    AGREEMENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT’S REGIME AND RULE. A
    CHARISMATIC GOVERNMENT USUALLY FEATURES WEAK POLITICAL AND
    ADMINISTRATIVE INSTITUTIONS, BECAUSE THEY DERIVE AUTHORITY FROM
    THE PERSONA OF THE LEADER, AND USUALLY DISAPPEAR WITHOUT THE
    LEADER IN POWER.
    - HOWEVER, IF THE CHARISMATIC LEADER HAS A SUCCESSOR, A
    GOVERNMENT DERIVED FROM THE CHARISMATIC LEGITIMACY MIGHT
    CONTINUE.
    3. RATIONAL-LEGAL LEGITIMACY
    - DERIVES FROM A SYSTEM OF INSTITUTIONAL PROCEDURE, WHERE
    GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS ESTABLISH AND ENFORCE LAW AND ORDER
    IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. THEREFORE, IT IS THROUGH PUBLIC TRUST THAT
    THE GOVERNMENT WILL ABIDE THE LAW THAT CONFERS RATIONAL-LEGAL
    LEGITIMACY.
    - A NATION THAT FOLLOWS A CONSTITUTION IS APPLYING THIS TYPE OF
    AUTHORITY.
    1. TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY

    FORMS OF
    LEGITIMATE
    GOVERNMENT
    COMMUNISM
    - THE ACTIONS OF THE COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT ARE LEGITIMATE, AUTHORIZED BY THE PEOPLE.
    IN THE EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURY, COMMUNIST PARTIES BASED THE ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING
    THE LEGITIMACY OF THEIR RULE AND GOVERNMENT UPON THE SCIENTIFIC RULE OF MARXISM.

    CONSTITUIONALISM
    - ESTABLISHES THE LAW AS SUPREME OVER THE PRIVATE WILL, BY THE INTEGRATING NATIONALISM,
    DEMOCRACY, AND LIMITED GOVERNMENT.
    - DERIVES FROM POPULAR BELIEF AND ACCEPTANCE THAT THE ACTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT ARE
    LEGITIMATE BECAUSE THEY ABIDE BY THE LAW CODIFIED IN THE POLITICAL CONSTITUTION.

    DEMOCRACY
    - GOVERNMENT LEGITIMACY DERIVES FROM THE POPULAR PERCEPTION THAT THE ELECTED
    GOVERNMENT ABIDES BY DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES IN GOVERNING, AND THUS IS LEGALLY
    ACCOUNTABLE TO ITS PEOPLE.

    FASCISM
    - BASED OPON THE ARGUMENTS OF TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY. FASCISM IS A POLITICAL SYSTEM
    HEADED BY A DICTATOR IN WHICH THE GOVERNMENT CONTRALS THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE AND
    OPPOSITION IS NOT PERMITTED.

    MONARCHY
    - THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS ESTABLISHES THE POLITICAL LEGITIMACY OF THE RULE OF THE
    MONARCH; LEGITIMACY ALSO DERIVES FROM THE POPULAR PERCEPTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE
    MONARCH AS THE RIGHTFUL RULER OF NATION AND COUNTRY.
    THE END

    You might also like