Political Institutions
By Tresha Marie A. Matol
Political dynasties are present in many nations, including those that classify as
democracies. However, traditional Philippine political families are so prominent. In the
Philippines, by making legitimate policy rivalry almost impossible, the over-dominance of
political dynasties has weakened the democratic process. The equity of the incumbent, whose
name reminding, and their patronage practices make power almost unbreakable by dynastic
politicians. More specifically, the uninterrupted expansion of political dynasties predicts the
decline of Philippine democracy because its dominance of the electoral process hinders the
general public from accessing public service opportunities. When engaging in electoral contests,
voters who are not political pedigrees are seriously disadvantaged.
The Philippine political process has long been characterized by political dynasties. The
political dynasties usually apply to traditional families or traditions that monopolize political
power and public authorities from generation to generation. Usually, they are defined as families
who establish their political or economic supremacy in a province and who have organized their
efforts to participate in national or other national political positions that represent prominent
people. Political dynasties typically have a powerful, centralized support base centered around
the predominant province.
In addition to that, the incompetent and corrupt dynastic leaders continue in many local
communities in the Philippines because those who can advance change but have no history of
political gain are denied the right to run for public office due to the monarchy of local politics.
Hardly any meaningful steps have been taken to resolve this issue, despite an overwhelming
awareness that political dynasties produce patronage politics and corruption. The prevalent
political dynasty is often seen as contributing to political rivalry and disparity between
candidates and a decrease in socioeconomic outcome by preventing people from directly
informing the government of their needs, enabling dynastic officials to use their power for their
ends, and making a prejudicial selection of political leaders.
Nonetheless, dynastic leaders may also attribute this concept of hereditary wealth and
linkages that prevent future generations from working hard. Dynastic politicians have a huge
profit from the start of their political careers. Due to factors such as popularity and incumbency,
they are statistically more likely to win elections in the face of politicians without such political
networks. Typically have less educational attainment, not bureaucratic nor academic
competence, as they rely on dynastic ties. Another negative influence from political dynasties is
that political dynasties appear to be for the status quo, developing values that are largely different
from those they should represent.
Politics consists of all societies battling and allocating scarce resources, including power,
wealth, status, and defense. When people pursue these aims, they mostly strive to increase their
prospects. How political life centers on ties that are mainly person to person, informal
hierarchical, is a type of societal organization in the Philippines. In nations where there are few
institutions to deal with citizens' demands, clientelist relations begin to flourish since most third
world countries today have weak democratic institutions. The Philippines' political system is one
of the poorest institutions as it is governed by leading political families. The combination of
particularism emphasis and relational change be clientelism. Moreover, the Philippines was an
authoritarian dictatorship run by President Marcos until the Philippines' democratic revolution
back in 1986. The Philippines is now a democratic country, but the authoritarian system does not
exist anymore. Although there are a continuing effect and impact that can be seen in all of the
Philippine cultures.