POLITICAL INSTITUITIONS

Politics, Power, and Authority

• As societies progressed through the centuries, people
organized themselves in more complex ways, and
relationships began to be increasingly defined by power and
authority. Among the most significant social developments
were the formulation of laws that defined social behavior,
promoted social order, and settled disputes. Leaders emerged
and they began to take on more responsibilities and exercised
vast authority over various aspects of social life. These social
changes consequently brought about changes in political life.
Politics
refers to activities through which people make, preserve,
and amend the general rules under which they live. It involves
the dynamics of conflict resolution and cooperation, as well as
the exercise of power.
In its broadest meaning, power refers to the ability to do
something in order to achieve a desired outcome. Hence, a
person with power has the capability to control people or make
them to do something that they would not do otherwise. Social
scientists emphasize the motion that power involves
relationship—there is no one who exercises power and another
who is subjected to it.
Authority
is legitimate power. This means that a person who has authority
has the right to exercise power. More concretely, the exercise of
authority means that the person who exercised power is obeyed by
the people because he or she is recognized as the rightful or
legitimate ruler or leader.
 Band during the prehistoric period were only comprised of
family members and their leadership structure was less
complicated and simple. Since, the concerns of bands were very
basic, such as collection of food or finding a place to settle in, the
one who assumed the role of the leader did not hold his or her
position permanently. He or she was recognized as the leader
mainly because of the skills that he or she possessed, particularly
in hunting. The establishment of larger communities such as tribes
and chiefdoms paved the way for more complex forms of
organizations where leadership was no longer based on skill. Other
bases of legitimacy of leadership came about. For instance,
because tribes were mainly comprised of clans, the headman was
actually the leader of his relatives which meant that the ties
between him and his subjects were personal.
 Consequently, as societies further progressed from bands to
nations, political structures and institutions evolved in different forms.
Following are several trends that have been observed pertaining to the
development of political structures and institutions throughout the
centuries:
1. Increased population;
2. Large surplus of resources;
3. Greater social inequality;
4. Less reliance on kinship relations as basis of political structures;
5. Increased internal and external conflict;
6. Increased power and responsibility of leaders; and
7. Increased burden on the population to support political leaders.
 Legitimacy and Types of Authority
The word legitimacy originated from the Latin word
legitimare, meaning “to declare lawful,” and is broadly defined
as “rightfulness.” Legitimacy confers on an order or command an
authoritative or binding character, thus transforming power into
authority. Political philosophers treat legitimacy as a moral or
rational principle that is the ground on which governments may
demand obedience from citizens. The claim to legitimacy is thus
more important than the fact of obedience. Political scientists,
however, usually see legitimacy on sociological terms; that is, as
a willingness to comply with a system of rule regardless of how
this is achieved.
 Max Weber studied the transformation of societies and observed
that the bases of legitimacy of rule vary in different types of
societies. He came up with three types of authority:
• Traditional
• Charismatic; and
• Legal-rational

For Weber, there must be an explanation or justification why

certain men rise to positions of authority or superiority and why
people obey them. Thus, the important question to be asked is what
makes a rule or law accepted and obeyed by people.
 Traditional Authority
In many societies, authority is based on a system that is
believed to have “always existed.” This is what is referred to as
traditional authority. Some people have this type of authority
because they inherited it or they occupy a position that has been
passed on to them. The legitimacy of this type of authority is
based on long-established customs and traditions that do not
need to be justified. Examples of traditional authority are those
exercised by elders in a tribe or an indigenous people’s group as
well as by monarchs who have inherited their power and
authority.
 Charismatic Authority
Charismatic authority is based on the presumed special and
extraordinary characteristics or qualities possessed by a certain
individual. People with charisma are often very popular, highly
persuasive, and inspire loyalty and obedience from other people.
They are also often seen as “born leaders” and “heroes”. Charisma is
generally considered a gift or innate quality unique to a person, but
there are also instances when it can be manufactured through the
use of propaganda. Historical figures who exemplified charismatic
authority include revolutionary Cuban leaders Fidel Castro and Che
Guevarra, Chinese revolutionary leader Mao Tse Tung, US President
John F. Kennedy, UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and Philippine
President Ramon Magsaysay.
 However, charismatic authority is the most unstable type of authority as
leaders may eventually “lose” their charisma when people’s views regarding them
change. Death or an illness may also diminish the level of charisma of a certain
authority figure.
 Legal-Rational

Legal-rational authority is the most typical type of authority in

modern societies. Power and authority in a legal-rational context are
legitimized by a clearly defined set of written rules and laws. Leaders
can rightfully wield authority if they obtain their positions according
to established procedures such as elections or through appointment.
Heads of governments such as presidents and prime ministers possess
legal-rational authority. Economically-developed societies are most
likely to have undergone the processes of rationalization and
bureaucratization and adhere most closely to the legal-rational
concept of authority. Among the three types of authority, a legal-
rational system has the highest degree of stability.
 The three types of authority identified by Weber are what he
referred to as the “ideal or pure types.” In practice, the type of
authority that is recognized in a certain society or state may be a mix
of these different types.
 Types of Political Organizations and
Leadership Structures
Anthropologists define political organizations as “the groups
within a culture that are responsible for public decision-making and
leadership, maintaining social cohesion and order, protecting group
rights, and ensuring safety from external threats.”

Political and leadership structures have evolved as

societies progressed overtime. From the emergence of simple bands,
tribes, and chiefdoms, to the establishment of modern nation-states,
different types of political organizations and leaderships structures
emerged as social interactions under went transformations.
The earlier types of societies such as bands and tribes
were basically dominated by personal and familial ties as
these were comprised of families and clans. In short, the
leaders were not simply political leaders or those who
made decisions for the society. The leaders exercised
their authority to settle disputes among the people. They
also decided on economic matters like the distribution of
foo, the selection of crops, determining harvest periods,
and securing territory. In a nutshell, the leader was seen
as the head of the community who ensured peace and
security within society. He was seen as a patriarch or a
patron and people depended on him for many things.
Political Dynasties
are believed to have always existed even in advanced
democratic states. A “dynasty” refers to a succession from
rulers from the same line of descent. Thus, relatives who stay
in power—specifically, members of one family who continuously
hold elective political positions—are considered members of a
political dynasty. Meanwhile, political clientelism (or
clientelistic politics) is define by Susan Stoke as “giving
material goods in return for electoral support.” The
relationship involves two parties: the patron (politician) and
the client (voter). These two political trends continue to be a
challenge to the Philippine political and leadership system.
 The onset of the Industrial Revolution brought about
significant changes in the economic, social, and political life of
societies. Most significant of these changes was the rise of the
modern nation-state

The terms “nation” and “state” are often used

interchangeably in everyday life. However, the distinctions
between these two have to be recognized. A nation consists of a
distinct population of people bound together by a common culture,
history, and tradition who are typically concentrated within a
specific geographic region. The state, on the other hand, is a
political unit that has sovereignty—the legitimate and ultimate
authority of the state—over an area of territory and the people
within it.
In an attempt to clarify the distinction between the nation and
state, it has been pointed out that the nation has two aspects—a
cultural community and a political community. However, not all
nations are recognized as states. Likewise, a state is not
equivalent to a single nation and may in fact be composed of
several nations. For example, Taiwan asserted its independence
from China and established its own government. However, many
states have not recognized Taiwan’s status as an independent
state and some consider it as a province of China. Another
example are the Kurdish people who compose a nation but are
found in different states in the Middle East such as Iran, Iraq,
Syria, and Turkey. Thus, a states is a political unit that
encompasses several communities, has bureaucracy, and has
leaders that possess legitimate power.
In contrast to the leaders of bands, tribes, and chiefdoms,
leaders of states have more responsibilities such as the
maintenance of law and order, securing state territory,
engaging in international relations, and preserving social
control.

Weber observed that the processes of rationalization and

bureaucratization that happened in Western European societies
were a consequence of industrialization. The expansion of
economic activities led to the rationalization of economic
functions of individuals which in turn paved the way for the
growth of bureaucracy. The tern bureaucracy means “rule by
officials”. For Weber, the bureaucracy is characterized by
“rationality, rule-governed behavior, and impersonal behavior.”
 Another significant process that happened in Western
Europe was political liberalization. This refers to the
emergence of liberal-democratic regimes that are
characterized by a representative form of democracy where
political office is gained through formal, competitive elections
in many Western societies. Thus, institutions such as political
parties emerged. Principles such as political equality and
electoral choice also developed. This led to the emergence of
an impersonal and legally-based type of leadership and this
soon became the norm in many European societies.

However, not all societies around the world went through

the same processes experienced in the West.
 For example, in the Philippines, the attempt to establish
political institutions patterned after the American model did
not necessarily bring about the type of liberal democracy
existing in the United States. Scholars agree that this is largely
due to a variety factors, including the type of political culture
tat exists in societies. Political culture refers to the pattern of
orientation to political objects such as parties, government,
and constitutions, expressed in beliefs, symbols, and values.
People generally acquire values and attitudes about politics
and political institutions through the process of political
socialization. Since societies have varied characteristics, the
effects of certain processes and how institutions work may also
differ. For example, the features of an ideal type of
bureaucracy conceptualized by Weber were not necessarily
Observed in all societies. Since the bureaucracy as assumed to
be a rational institution, the exercise of authority within the
bureaucracy was expected to be impersonal. However,
impersonality in the exercise of authority is something that is
not present in all bureaucracies. Even in politics, the
persistence of clientelism, which was typical in tribes and
chiefdoms, indicates that the ties between a “patron” (or one
who gives benefits) and a “client” (the recipient of the
benefits) have not ceased to exist in some societies.
Clientelistic behavior has also been observed even in the
conduct of democratic elections. For example, in some areas
in the Philippines, voters still tend to choose candidates whom
they have personal ties with, particularly those who have
served as their benefactors, and have provided them various
Forms of assistance such as paying for their medical
expenses, providing them jobs and giving scholarships to
their children.