ARTICLE CRITIQUE

Political dynasties in the Philippines: Persistent patterns,

perennial problems
by: Tadem, T.S., Tadem E.C (2016)

The article ‘Political dynasties in the Philippines: Persistent patterns, perennial problems’
written by Tadem, T.S, Tadem E seeks to address the general nature of Philippine political
dynasties. It is emphasized that “following independence in 1946, the story of political family is
one of remarkable resilience facilitated by a combination of militarisation and economic
diversification” (3).

It is coherent from the abstract that this is no simple issue. The article was fairly clear and
enlightened the readers even in the first couple paragraphs from pg. 2-4. In these pages, the
authors strongly stated that dynastic politicians dominate the government offices and may
operate like ‘roving thieves’ stealing wealth and resources indiscriminately in order to maximize
their own economic interests at the expense of their populace. Because they operate under a
weak rule of law and have access to extractive businesses with immediate advantages, roving
thieves are urged to steal and damage. Today, these clans have been running from one post to the
next, and if they exceed the term limit, they are replaced by their children, spouse, and siblings.
They are incredibly influential in their local cities and they consistently get the votes of the
citizens. The authors exclaimed that although the Constitution explicitly prohibits political
dynasties, no law has been passed to enforce it, even after three decades and that the passage of
law remains impossible to achieve as long as the majority of the legislators with the power of the
executive belong to political dynasties.

“The resilience of the established political dynasties across the decades was in great part
due to their ability to diversify economically, enabling them to adapt and hold on to their
political power. At the same time, for new dynasties, the accumulation of a diversity of economic
interests means that a small dynasty can emerge from even the poorest provinces of the country”
(4) This sets the context that the authors view political dynasties as a threat in the destruction of
democracy and undermines the quality of economic development in the long growth in the
Philippines in, which Filipinos fought with hope to demolish during the ‘People Power
Revolution’ in 1986.

The article established a strong link between the prevalence of political dynasties and
underdevelopment. However, I think the paper aimed more to inform and educate the people of
the Philippines so I recommend using less profound words and conclusions. In order to have
more people be engaged and read the whole article it needs a more concise introduction and the
authors did a good job in that context. The authors also included many examples of work written
by those who have written on this subject in the past. The authors cite people like Sidel, Mccoy,
and Mendoza. These are good, well-known examples and authors and I think it adds a great deal
of credibility to the piece as a whole.
 ARTICLE CRITIQUE

In conclusion, the authors began and ended with a strong consistent point by sticking to
how the political clans maintain their power, influence, and authority over the course of
generations and how this affected the economic growth the Philippines experienced since the
‘People Power Revolution’; the post-Marcos era which the authors called as “a replica of the pre-
martial law era”. Finally, the authors successfully made a solid piece of writing with a key
message for government officials, organizations, political elites, and countrymen. When read as a
whole, the article is pertinent and highly convincing, however, it starts slowly and never lays out
a specific strategy for handling this challenging issue.