Summary of Creation of an Elite-dominated politics

The Spanish colonizers in the Philippines strengthened the powers of local

elites in areas where they existed and created elites who helped them govern
in places where such elites did not exist, resulting in a highly stratified social
structure. Elites with Spanish blood, privileged to have been educated or with
fathers holding political positions and amassing vast amounts of land and
wealth, continued to hold considerable power even during the American
period. They became pro-Americans during the second phase of colonization
due to the growing demand for the redistribution of economic benefits and
resources. Despite the principle of "Filipinization" during the American period,
the government continued to be dominated by elites with Spanish blood
because they were willing to embrace American colonialism.

With the emergence of the postcolonial state, these elites continued to hold
power. A national oligarchy essentially recruited from families of long-standing
economic wealth or political dominance defined the nature and direction of
electoral politics, with large landowners, commercial magnates, and their
scions filling both houses of Congress and offices of municipal halls and
provincial capitols throughout the archipelago. These elites have become the
"strong men" in society, enhancing their already established place in the
community representing the state and using the state as an instrument for
pursuing their personal interests.

Summary of weak social control

The Philippines' state has failed to centralize its powers, resulting in

corruption, patrimonial plunder, electoral fraud, and clan-based politics. This
compromise weakens the state as an institution for governance, as local and
regional leaders, politicians, and implementors accommodate each other in
political, economic, and social exchanges, leading to a more likely allocation
of resources that benefits them rather than the people in their communities.
The state also becomes dependent on local stability, losing its autonomy. The
imperative to survive as political leaders has encouraged state leaders to
undertake measures that undermine the capacity of the state to implement
policy goals. These measures include using powers of appointment to shuffle
personnel, creating agencies with overlapping functions, and buying off
agencies and organizations that directly benefit state leaders.

The legitimacy of state powers is questioned, and the state's capacity to

enforce laws and rules that benefit society is compromised. This defeats the
purpose of establishing a state, as the proper function and scope of state
activity is to ensure that common interests are adequately catered for.

When rules beneficial to the whole society are enforced, members of society
voluntarily adhere to the norms prescribed by the state, weakening a state's
social control. The behavior prescribed by state rules is unable to take
precedence or subordinate "people's" interests, leading to a highly reactive
society.