To be a party to an organization is to be identified to that organization and renunciation of the other party. However, in the Philippine case politicians freely and gracefully shift from one party to another, the other changed his mind and do the same. Party- switching had been a common scenario in the Philippine politics. Its occurrence is usually at election times or at times when there is a need to resolve a certain conflict involving a political issue or question and during times of revolutions and People Power. True enough the party system of the country seems to resemble chameleons of politicians going from one party to another. On several occasions when there is a need of choosing a stand, no contemporary party in the country had solidly put a stance. Member politicians usually pursue what they had in mind and in compromising with the other members of his own party and with that party unwilling to take his side, he resorts to switching parties. There will always be a surprise during times of People Power where a number of personalities from the other party join the other for their support of their grievances and stance. The recent division of the lower house regarding whether to impeach or not to impeach Gloria Macapagal Arroyo easily shows the different flaws in the Philippine Party System. Each party did not vote as a party but individually. In times of elections, one party will attack the other by attacking the personality of a member of the opponents and not that of the programs or criticism of the platforms set forth. During these times, propaganda against a politician is always a common scenario. The Philippine Political system seems to be a game of personalities. What does this mirror in the political and socio-cultural facet of the country? Could these liabilities be solved? What are the roots of this personal politics, weak party-system and turncoatism? These and other related subjects will be the focus of the study. We will try to discern the different factors affecting the issue at hand and also to enumerate the different effects of this kind of system in the political and social arena of the country.
What gives rise to the phenomenon of turncoatism in the Philippines? Sub- Questions:
What gives rise to this phenomenon?
What are its different manifestations in the Philippine politics? 3.
What are its effects in the Philippine political process? 4.
What can be done about it?
Turncoatism could be an indicative of a weak and non-ideological party–system which makes it easy for politicians to shift from one party to another. It also may be indicative of the preeminence of politicking and a struggle for power over sticking to principles and ideology. General Objectives:
To identify the roots of turncoatism, and to study its manifestations and implications on the political and societal aspects of the country. Specific Objectives:
To discuss the electoral and Party- System of the country. 2.
To discuss turncoatism, its nature, evolution and existence in the Philippines. 3.
To study its manifestations at the level of national politics. 4.
To analyze the causes and effects of political turncoatism on the political and societal aspects of the Philippines. 5.
To give recommendations on what can be done to prevent, minimize or resolve turncoatism.
International Politics is really my craft and is where I am aligned into. I thought of different issues that I could actually study regarding my interests. I thought of Roadmap for Economic Integration and ASEAN Common Time. Both are interesting enough, but would cause me a lot of time and pressures since some terms and issues and document are not readily available. Also, since these issues are not yet implemented, I can get problems with sources and triangulations may cost me a lot of tactics and strategies.
Then I carefully thought of the next big thing, and that is...
References: Abueva, Jose. (1997). Democracy: Philippine Perspective in Philippine Democratization and the Consolidation of Democracy since the 1986 Revolution: An Overview of the Main Issues, Trends and Prospects. Quezon City: UP Press. pp. 26-28.
Acosta, Nereus. (2000). Alternative Pinoy Politics: Sketching Roadmaps in Philippine Political Culture: Views from Inside the Halls of Power. Chapter 1. Quezon City: Kayumanggi Press. pp. 69-93
Adriano, Fermin, Ph.D
Bionat, Marvin. (1998). How to Win or Lose in Philippine Elections. QC: Oregon International Publishing Co. pp. 72-73.
Coronel, Shiela, et.al. (1999). The Rulemakers: How the Wealthy and Well-Born Dominate the Congress. Quezon City: Philippine Institute for Investigative Journalism, 2002. pp. 59-69.
Dapen, Liang. (1976). Philippine Parties and Politics. USA Edward Brother Incorporated.
David, Paul. (1968). The Changing Political Parties in Parties and the Governmental System: A Book of Readings. ed.by. Garold Thumm and Edward Janosik. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Incorporate, Englewoods Cliff. pp.18-24.
De Quiros, Conrado. (1992). Guns, Goons and Government in In 1992 and Beyond: Forces and Issues in Philippine Elections. ed. by. Lorna Kalaw-Tirol and Sheila Coronel Quezon City: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. pp. 7-33.
Duverger, Maurice. (1955). Political Parties. translated by Barbara and Robert North. United Kingdom: London Methuen & Co. LTD.
Funderburk, Charles and Thobaben Robert. (1989) Political Ideologies: Left, Center and Right. USA: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. pp. 1-13.
Garrido, Marco. The mad, mad world of Philippine politics. Asia Times. firstname.lastname@example.org. January 22, 2005.
Gutierrez, Eric, et.al. (1992). All in the Family: A Study of Elites and Power Relations in the Philippines. Ed. by. Noel Pangilinan. Diliman, Quezon City: Institute for Popular Democracy. pp. 165-166.
Holmes Ronald. (1995). Philippine Political Spectrum in Philippine Government. ed. by. Ronald Holmes. Manila: De La Salle University Press. pp. 113-120.
Inkles, Alex. (1991). Transitions to Democracy. Society. May-June 1991 iissue.
Magno, Francisco. (1995). Concepts in Philippine Government in Philippine Government. ed. by. Ronald Holmes. Manila: De La Salle University Press. pp. 3-16
Meinarudus, Ronald. Resident Representative of the Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation in the Philippines and a commentator on Asian affairs. (08-14-2003) [Liberal Times] Political Parties and Ideological Mainstreams. Korea times. July 23, 2005
Mendoza, Diana J
Neumann, Sigmund. (1968). Toward a Comparative Study of Political Parties in Parties and the Governmental System: A Book of Readings. ed.by. Garold Thumm and Edward Janosik. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Incorporate, Englewoods Cliff. pp.7-18
Riedinger, Jeffrey. (2001). Caciques and Coups: The Challenge of Democratic Consolidation in the Philippines in the Philippines in Dynamics of Philippine Politics: A Canon of Readings, Mimeographed. UST: Faculty of Arts and Letters, p. 32-52.
Sabangan, Annie Ruth C. (2004). Turncoatism breeds chameleons. Manila Times. www. manilatimes . com. July 22, 2005
Salonga, Jovito R
Sidel, John. (1998) Take the Money and Run? Personality Politics in Post Marcos Era. Public Policy. July-September issue. pp.2-9.
Thompson, Mark R. (1996). Off the Endangered List: Philippine Democratization in Comparative Politics, Vol. 28, Issue No. 2. pp. 179-205
Varela, Amelia P. (1994). Administrative Culture and Political Change. 1st ed. Diliman, Quezon City: College of Public Administration, University of the Philippines Press, p. 1-21, 88-99, 195-313
American Parties in Comparative Perspective. internet. Data. July 22, 2005. http;/wps.ablongman.com/long_Edwards_gab7/0,8044,879421-,00.html.
Sa pagkakataon na mayroon kayong komento, tanong o reaksyon maaari po kayong makipag-ugnayan sa akin,. Maari nyo po akong makausap sa numerong ito, 09209275703.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document