The lies being told about federalism, political dynasties and poverty
OPPONENTS of federalism are on high gear. They launched a movement against Charter - - hand in its crafting.
At the outset, let me state that federalism is not a panacea. It arguments pushing for its adop strength and validity are based on the experience and studies from historical realities very much different from ours.
it, the basis for such should at least rely on valid arguments, and not phantom fears that are products of partisan political spins, and should not border on intellectual dishonesty.
One of the main arguments to discredit federalism is the faulty claim that it nurtures political dynasties, making it appear as if such is an inevitable outcome embed
And to give it a further spin, - aged as causing poverty and underdevelopment. Many political scientists and other scholars of political systems have produced volumes of arguments that paint dynasties as a scourge in our political landscape, effectively preventing democratization and development.
Ergo, by mathematical transitiv federalism is anti-development.
No less than the framers of the in its text an anti-political dynasty - sion has not been enabled by any legislation from a Congress most - manifestation of having relatives simultaneously occupying elective posts, or as a “thin” one of having inherited the post from a relative.
The difficulty in legislating against political dynasties is not just because of the recalcitrance of politicians. More importantly, it is simply because doing so in familial and communalistic - ments are so organically rooted in our consciousness and our actual social relations.
There is no question that some dynasties have become retardants - ment. But there are also those that - calities. In fact, a study conducted by a team headed by Ronald U. Beja Jr., Victor S. Venida and David B. Yap entitled “Political Dynasties and Poverty: Evidence from the Philippines,” has revealed that there is less evidence that political dynasties exacerbate poverty. What they found is that it is in fact poverty that breeds the condition for political dynasties to thrive.
Thus, it is not political dynasties that should be controlled, but the prevalence of poverty. An anti-po eliminate the symptom. Considering that political dynasties do not contribute to poverty incidence, but in fact is an outcome of it, and further considering that it is an organic social institution that per it can even inadvertently lead to - necessarily be dysfunctional, but that provide social insurance to local communities in times of need. but to rely on political patrons.
The solution therefore is not to eliminate political dynasties, but to bring forth policy innovations - erty, landlessness, lack of access to health care and credit facilities and other social exclusion issues. Having a robust developmental shift to state institutions instead of relying on patronage mechanisms
The claim that federalism nurtures political dynasties is another big lie that should be corrected. In fact, it can even be argued that a properly structured, can break up the base for the concentration of It is empirically supported by evidence that political dynasties are local in character, and usually thrive from the barangay up until the provincial level. A federal system of government that is organized along the current - region, the political dynasties other provinces.
as the basis for forming the states can also provide an appropriate setting for the strengthening of governance mechanisms that are autonomous and independent of control by any single political dynasty. All major government de regional offices, and regional development councils already exist to provide grounds for more professional and less partisan modes of governance that can mediate the reforms needed to push for local state development in a federal set-up.
Thus, the claim that federalism almost automatically breeds conditions favorable for political dynasties is nothing but a base study of Mendoza et al is spun conveniently timed to support the anti-federalism position.
Perhaps, this is aggravated by - - ing against political dynasties. While accurate in saying that political dynasties are indicators of poverty and underdevelopment, Mendoza appeared to have misrepresented the core of his study dynasties, especially of the “fat” kind, should be the target of antipolitical dynasty legislation. The evidence to prove that dynasties cause poverty, and that it is poverty that enables political dynasties. It is therefore terribly off the logic of rational policy design that the effect is the one targeted for legislation to promote social inclusion, and not the cause.
Obviously, the opponents of diagnosis of the problem of political dynasties in relation to federalism. - edy that targets political dynasties even if these are only the symptoms of the problem.