Document-5.pdf

POLSC204 (September 16, 2023) POLITICAL PARTY Political parties – are core institutions of a functioning democracy; essential to ensure that we have competing visions on different public interests. Opposition parties – important for accountability Electoral ballot sample: Alphabetical; Political...

POLSC204 (September 16, 2023) POLITICAL PARTY Political parties – are core institutions of a functioning democracy; essential to ensure that we have competing visions on different public interests. Opposition parties – important for accountability Electoral ballot sample: Alphabetical; Political Parties are stated “The way that the ballot is structured is very reflective of our current party system” What could be an ideal format for this? Emphasis should be on the political parties and not on their names. Instead of the candidates names being arranged alphabetically, we might consider first the party Or there must be a standout section for all the political parties and their political agenda. We are a majority type of voting but in some positions only one candidate is listed so we are forced to only vote for one. It also reflects that the comelec cannot be controlled. It should be based on preference, political agendas, or political affiliation. Several periods of the Party System. American from 1935; predominant party system that is not established Post war Republic, 1946-1972; two party system Liberal and the Nacionalista Marcos Era; 1978 – 1986; two party system Post Marcos; 1977- present; multi party system “There was transition from a premature predominantly and christian centered party system to a two party system and a sudden shift to a multi party after the Martial Law.” Why did we transition to a multiparty system? What paved the way for a multiparty system in the Philippines? 4 elections 1978 International Assembly 19801 : 981 Local Government Elections 1982 First Barangay Elections Kilusang Bagong Lipunan 1987 formula= direct democracy + majority vote+ participative vote and participativ proportional representation. Why is this the case? What happened during the martial law period. There are literatures that 1987 was primarily created for liberating the filipinos from authoritarian rule, if this is your priority then, you are not very strategic about it because it focuses on the emotions of that time. We are all hungry for freedom during the martial law. Cory is not really the mother of democracy. If you are in the edsa 1 back then, what we would’ve done during the edsa 1? We missed something crucial that affected our political beahvious and culture up to this time. For example the leni event, we visited the event due to the metiona attachment of leni introducing good givernnce but its all boutr had the young generation been as smart as political savvy and well acquainted with politics, and had the information been os accessible compared ti the revolution of edsa it would ve been a different scenario Edsa one happened because we were so in rush to be freed with the authroaitarian rule of ,marcos but we missed the political requirement of a democracy: which means having a homegenize society. We had a window of opportunity during the 1987 , admin of aquino; they shouldve thought that before they create a constitution that is so promising. We want all principles of democracy to be achieve because of the emotional attachment we had during the martial law era and we missed the fact that we are not under a political consesus. There’s no proactive political concesus that was asserted. Alll we wanted was new consti, new government, normalize everything. And the process of normalization is different on the process of democratization. When you normalize things you either reduce to yournormalize state or reduce to original state with missing parts. The process of democratization need a homogenous society and political concensus, societal consolidation. It Is not our fault but having a multi system now is not thought upon strategically and comprehensiove;ly but because we chose democracy at the face that is more acceptable to us during that time. Majority rule vs. plurality vote Is majority always the popular choice? Can a majority be a plural and can the plural be the majority? No, Majority isnt necessarily something that is linear (50%+1); ideally there has to be a governing body that would ensure that the way we vote are well reprresented. Satin wal dahil direct. Kaya mhirap magpasa ng batas sa multiparty systems because there is no entity that would check the majority. The more popular candidate is the candidate that was chosen as their first priority of most voters; Highest level of preference. Majority = all about the number of votes Plurality = the hierarchy of the political goal or the hierarchy of preference. The more popular choice is plurality because it covers your spectrum of the preference eof the voter. Meanwhile in the majority, the only guiding principle is to meet the 50 excess. Both of them are for proportional representation. But the difference is that the agenda setting based for a multiparty is based on the persona of the leader. Polarization means that there are political differences in a democracy. Also a hint that democracy is functioning. Elite polarization = actions of elites before emotional raction of mass Mass polarization = emotional reaction of the masses governs them before the action of the elites Maurice Duverger = french political scientist who understood the assignment that propose a law and hypothesis about the relationship between th enumber of parties in a state and its electoral system. He suggested that we way we vote, dictates the number of parties. If this is the case, then we can still make a change. Even though our culture is damaged, the way we vote explains the number of parties so if we can change the way we vote, it might change the number of party system which can best represent our form of democracy. He has a law and hypothesis Principle: a state with a plurality rule will tend to become a two party system as long as there is a threshold which we cal fptp system and this hypothesis needs to be proven first and is open for conjecture; a state that is using proportional representation will tend to become a multiparty system. How can we explain this? If the voting public, will only vote in plural way then we can create a two party system. For example, 1st rule; you can only create a two party system if you have a plurality rule; which candidate has the most popularity in terms of agenda. Ang effect is mechanical ; Hypotheses: a state the uses proportional representation will tend to become a multi party system because proportional represteantion creates spiritual families and coalitions and so thefefct is psychological, avoids the wasted vote. Our multi partyy system is: We represnet lots of sectors ; kind of Is it stable; no Do we encourage meritocracy; NO Are candidates eligible; no Is there identity politics; yes Is there a chance for us to get out of this cycle? If we don’t want a multiparty then we shold not expect a higher voter turnout We like a lot of options, parang sa groceries. We create parties because th consti allows that. At what point do we encourage a multi party system if we want a degree of political participation in the philippine society. People are easily swayed, and we get lazy. So participation is lower. Multiparty system is better for us if we want a higher voter turnout and high level of political participation, coming from people that is not political savvy and as not educted. “ the more that you make people stupid in politics, the more you win in politics” What is the way out? What is the workable future for Philippines? There is a way out for us, there is hope. Democracy is still our only choice for now. Its okay to be polarized, We are a multiparty system, but toxic polarization happens because of the notion of us versus them. Most dangerous form of polarization for democracy is the one based on identity. Kapag inattackna yung identity of the person. We focus on identity versus. Policy goal = magiging personalistic tayo Do you think we have to change to a two party system? Hindi natin kaya, but what could be the long term solution? Slow trasnsformative system Deliberative democracy = we deliberately change the system Deliberative mini-public/ citizen assemblies / citizen council = Sortition Democracy, you create representative groups of citizens and they are brought together to deliberately discuss and recommend reforms. It has a following mechanism: Sortition= drawlots; to sort; assures fairness in allocation role and decision making authptity, random selection Models of democracy including a randomly selected deliberative mini public (DMP) Tamed Consultation Radical Democracy Representative Klerocracy Hybrid Polyarchy You have the state the mini public. E,g. Chloe’s citizen movements = institutionalized by the state; with help of media encourages lots of agenda in different political clans. From these clans we have a lot of voters too. Chloe movement will drawlots ; let’s say green agenda won, supporters of these agenda will encourage representation that will reflect the randomly selected agenda Ballots ay may recommended by citizen assembly . There is a possibility that ph will build different citizen assemblies but the only difference is that a mini public allows randomness;we allow randomness to dictate the political reform When we join an org and ensure that we are really going to participate in that org: how do we recruit the members? The environment can be manage on how we organize our political behaviour