Why should ethics be taught well to college students?

 Click this link

Learning from the Past and the Future

by Alan S. Cajes 

During a special forum with C. Otto Scharmer on May 24, 2019 in Manila, I took part in an intimate sharing session on the topic "Thriving in the Age of Disruption: The Emergence of the Eco-System Leader." It also served as an opportunity to discuss some ideas with Scharmer related to his Theory U. In his book entitled "The Essentials of Theory U," Scharmer shares some insights on learning. He said: "There are two different sources of learning: (1) learning by reflecting on the past and (2) learning by sensing and actualizing emerging future possibilities." These distinct sources of learning are crucial for personal and organizational development. 

In an era of accelerating VUCA change, leaders and organizations face a fundamental challenge: how do we learn effectively when both the pace of change and the volume of information exceed our traditional processing capabilities? The answer may lie in recognizing that human learning operates through two complementary yet distinct modalities that have been understood for millennia, but are only now being validated by contemporary neuroscience. 

Two Sources of Learning 

Effective learning draws from two primary sources that together create a complete epistemological framework: 

• Learning from Yesterday: Retrospective Analysis - This involves the systematic examination of past experiences and outcomes to extract patterns, principles, and insights. Through careful analysis of both successes and failures, individuals and organizations build a repository of practical wisdom that informs future decision-making. 

This mode of learning emphasizes empirical observation, pattern recognition, and the gradual accumulation of knowledge through experience. 

• Learning from Tomorrow: Prospective Sensing - This forward-looking approach involves developing sensitivity to emerging trends, nascent possibilities, and future potentials that have not yet fully materialized. Rather than extrapolating from past data, this mode requires cultivating the capacity to perceive weak signals, recognize emerging patterns, and engage with possibilities that exist at the edge of current reality. 

The integration of these two approaches creates a dynamic learning system that honors accumulated wisdom while remaining open to transformative possibilities. 

Classical Philosophical Foundations 

This dual epistemological framework finds profound resonance in the foundational works of Western philosophy, suggesting that the recognition of multiple learning modalities has ancient roots. 

• Platonic Epistemology: The Divided Line of Knowledge - Plato's epistemology, most fully developed in the Republic and Meno, distinguished between knowledge acquired through sensory experience (doxa) and the deeper understanding that emerges through recollection (anamnesis). In the famous dialogue with the slave boy, 

Plato demonstrates how genuine mathematical insight arises not from external instruction but from the soul's recognition of eternal truths it encountered before birth. This Platonic insight parallels our contemporary understanding of prospective sensing: sometimes we recognize emerging truths not through analytical deduction but through a deeper form of recognition that transcends ordinary reasoning. The capacity to sense future possibilities may operate through similar mechanisms of recognition rather than calculation. 

• Aristotelian Empiricism: From Sensation to Wisdom - Aristotle's Posterior Analytics and Nicomachean Ethics established the empirical foundation that would later influence Aquinas and shape Western scientific methodology. His epistemological hierarchy—from sensation (aisthesis) through experience (empeiria) to scientific knowledge (episteme) and wisdom (sophia)—provides a systematic framework for learning from accumulated experience. However, 

Aristotle also recognized nous (intuitive intellect) as the faculty that grasps first principles directly, without demonstration. This suggests that even within his empirical framework, Aristotle acknowledged forms of immediate insight that complement gradual learning from experience. 

• Thomistic Synthesis: Natural and Supernatural Knowledge Thomas Aquinas, in the Summa Theologica and De Veritate, achieved a remarkable synthesis of Aristotelian empiricism with Christian theological insights. His distinction between natural knowledge (acquired through sensory experience and rational analysis) and supernatural knowledge (received through divine infusion) provides a framework for understanding both methodical learning from experience and the more mysterious process of breakthrough insight. 

Aquinas's concept of infused knowledge—understanding that arrives complete and transformative rather than through gradual accumulation—offers a medieval parallel to contemporary research on insight and intuitive cognition. 

Contemporary Neuroscientific Validation 

Modern neuroscience provides compelling empirical support for these philosophical distinctions, revealing the specific brain mechanisms that underlie both retrospective analysis and prospective sensing. 

Memory Consolidation and Retrospective Learning. - Research in cognitive neuroscience has illuminated the biological basis of learning from experience. The hippocampus plays a crucial role in consolidating memories during sleep, strengthening synaptic connections and integrating new information with existing knowledge structures (Squire & Kandel, 2009). This process of memory consolidation literally rewrites our neural architecture, allowing us to extract increasingly sophisticated patterns from accumulated experience. 

Studies of expertise development show how deliberate practice creates domain-specific neural networks that enable rapid pattern recognition and skilled performance (Ericsson & Pool, 2016). This research validates the importance of systematic reflection on past experience as a foundation for developing practical wisdom. 

Predictive Processing and Future Sensing. - Emerging research on predictive processing reveals that the brain is fundamentally a prediction machine, constantly generating models of future possibilities (Clark, 2016). The default mode network—a collection of brain regions active during rest—engages in extensive mental time travel, simulating potential scenarios and preparing responses to anticipated events (Buckner & Carroll, 2007). 

This neurological capacity for "learning from tomorrow" involves the prefrontal cortex's ability to integrate weak signals into coherent anticipatory frameworks. Recent studies suggest that individuals with stronger default mode network connectivity show enhanced capacity for creative insight and future-oriented thinking. 

Intuitive Cognition and Rapid Pattern Recognition.- Research on intuitive decision-making has revealed how the brain processes complex information below conscious awareness. Antoine Bechara's landmark studies using the Iowa Gambling Task demonstrated that participants develop physiological responses to advantageous choices before they can consciously articulate the underlying patterns (Bechara et al., 1997). 

This research on "somatic markers" suggests that our capacity to sense emerging possibilities operates through rapid, unconscious pattern matching that precedes analytical reasoning. The brain's ability to detect subtle patterns and generate intuitive responses provides a neurological foundation for prospective sensing. 

Insight and Neural Reorganization. - Neuroimaging studies of insight experiences reveal that breakthrough moments involve the sudden reorganization of neural networks. The "Aha!" experience appears in EEG recordings as distinctive gamma wave bursts, suggesting that transformative learning occurs when the brain rapidly reconfigures existing knowledge into novel patterns (Jung-Beeman et al., 2004). 

These findings indicate that both retrospective reflection and prospective sensing can trigger insight experiences, validating the integration of both learning modalities as neurologically grounded approaches to understanding. 

Implications for Leadership and Organizational Learning 

This convergence of ancient wisdom and contemporary science suggests several important implications for how we approach learning in complex, rapidly changing environments: Balanced Learning Portfolios: Effective leaders and organizations need to cultivate both retrospective analytical capabilities and prospective sensing abilities. This requires creating structures and practices that support both systematic reflection on experience and openness to emerging possibilities. 

• Multiple Ways of Knowing: Recognizing the validity of both analytical and intuitive forms of cognition can help leaders make better decisions in uncertain environments. The integration of data-driven analysis with pattern sensing and intuitive insight creates a more robust decision-making framework. 

• Contemplative Leadership: The cultivation of prospective sensing may require practices that quiet the analytical mind and create space for subtle pattern recognition. This suggests the importance of contemplative practices in leadership development. 

Toward an Integrated Epistemology 

The recognition that learning operates through dual modalities—retrospective analysis and prospective sensing—represents more than an interesting theoretical insight. It points toward a more complete understanding of human cognition that honors both the accumulated wisdom of experience and the creative capacity to sense emerging possibilities. 

This integrated approach to learning, supported by both ancient philosophical wisdom and contemporary neuroscientific research, offers a foundation for navigating complexity and uncertainty with both practical grounding and creative responsiveness. In a world where the future increasingly differs from the past, our capacity to learn from both yesterday and tomorrow becomes not just advantageous but essential. 

References

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275(5304), 1293-1295.

Buckner, R. L., & Carroll, D. C. (2007). Self-projection and the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 49-57.

Clark, A. (2016). Surfing uncertainty: Prediction, action, and the embodied mind. Oxford University Press.

Ericsson, A., & Pool, R. (2016). Peak: Secrets from the new science of expertise. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Jung-Beeman, M., Bowden, E. M., Haberman, J., Frymiare, J. L., Arambel-Liu, S., Greenblatt, R., ... & Kounios, J. (2004). Neural activity when people solve verbal problems with insight. PLoS Biology, 2(4), e97.

Squire, L. R., & Kandel, E. R. (2009). Memory: From mind to molecules. Scientific American Library.

Code of Conduct for Public Officials and Employees

Reference Document for Officials and Employees

of Local Government Units in Drafting a 

"Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards Ordinance" 

Draft Sponsorship Speech

Honorable Presiding Officer, esteemed colleagues in this august chamber, municipal officials and employees, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen:

It is my distinct honor and privilege today to sponsor this significant ordinance titled, "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards Ordinance." As public servants, our primary obligation is to ensure the welfare, prosperity, and trust of our constituents. This ordinance represents a vital step toward fulfilling these obligations by institutionalizing the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and accountability within our local government.

Legally, this ordinance aligns our local policies with national laws, notably Republic Act No. 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. It enhances our compliance with essential statutes that guide the behavior of public officials, reinforcing our commitment to uphold the principle that "public office is a public trust." Moreover, it fortifies our adherence to existing procurement laws, transparency mandates, and ethical practices, thus safeguarding our municipality from legal disputes and liabilities.

Morally, this ordinance emphasizes our commitment to ethical governance. By clearly defining prohibited acts such as conflicts of interest, unauthorized acceptance of gifts, nepotism, and the misuse of public resources, we reinforce moral leadership and ethical integrity. Such standards are not merely idealistic aspirations but practical requirements to sustain public trust and confidence in our leadership and administration.

Transparency and accountability provisions detailed in Section 6 significantly empower our constituents. By mandating public disclosures, citizen participation, transparent procurement, regular audits, and robust whistleblower protection, we cultivate an informed and engaged citizenry, essential in democratic governance.

The moral obligation to safeguard public resources and uphold the integrity of our offices necessitates clear ethical guidelines, strong accountability mechanisms, and transparent governance processes. The measures prescribed by this ordinance ensure that public trust is not compromised, resources are not squandered, and corruption is decisively deterred.

In adopting this ordinance, we are not just complying with our legal responsibilities; we are proactively shaping a municipal government that embodies honesty, fairness, and responsiveness. It is our solemn duty and privilege to create and sustain an environment where public service is synonymous with integrity, professionalism, and accountability.

I urge my distinguished colleagues in this chamber to lend your full support to this ordinance. Together, let us take this historic step toward ensuring good governance, ethical conduct, and a legacy of honorable public service for the benefit of our beloved constituents and future generations.

Thank you, and may we continue to serve with unwavering integrity and commitment.

Draft Ordinance

Republic of the Philippines
Province of [Name of Province]
Municipality of [Name of Municipality]
OFFICE OF THE SANGGUNIANG BAYAN

ORDINANCE NO. [Ordinance Number]
SERIES OF 2025

AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF [MUNICIPALITY NAME], PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

WHEREAS, Section 1, Article XI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution declares that "Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency;"

WHEREAS, Republic Act No. 6713, known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, mandates local governments to uphold high standards of ethics and professionalism in public service;

WHEREAS, it is imperative to institutionalize ethical standards, clear guidelines, and accountability mechanisms for local public officials and employees to maintain public trust and confidence;

NOW, THEREFORE, be it enacted by the Sangguniang Bayan of [Municipality Name] in session duly assembled:

SECTION 1. TITLE

This Ordinance shall be known as the "Municipality of ______ Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards Ordinance."

SECTION 2. DECLARATION OF POLICIES

It is hereby declared the policy of the Municipality to uphold high ethical standards in public service, promoting integrity, transparency, accountability, and professionalism among its officials and employees.

SECTION 3. DEFINITION OF TERMS

As used in this Ordinance:

• "Public Officials and Employees" refers to all elected and appointed officials, permanent, temporary, contractual, casual, or job order employees of the Municipality;
• "Conflict of Interest" arises when a public official or employee is involved in personal activities or interests that could interfere with the impartial performance of their official duties;
• "Gift" refers to anything of value given without adequate consideration in exchange;
• "Ethical Conduct" means adherence to professional standards and moral principles;
• "Nepotism" refers to favoritism based on familial relationships.

SECTION 4. COVERAGE AND APPLICABILITY

This Ordinance applies to all officials and employees of the Municipality of ____________.

SECTION 5. PROHIBITED ACTS

The following actions shall be strictly prohibited within the jurisdiction of this Local Government Unit, and constitute violations punishable under this Ordinance:

5.1 Conflict of Interest:

No public official or employee shall:

• Directly or indirectly hold a financial or material interest in any transaction requiring approval by their office or department.
• Participate or intervene in any official decision, deliberation, or proceeding that may directly benefit their own business, financial, family, or personal interests.

5.2 Solicitation and Acceptance of Gifts, Favors, and Benefits:

Public officials and employees shall not:

• Solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, entertainment, favor, loan, or anything of monetary value from any individual, organization, or entity engaged in business transactions, regulatory activities, or otherwise interacting with their respective offices.
• Accept any honorarium, stipend, or payment for services rendered in the official performance of their duties unless explicitly authorized by law or ordinance.

5.3 Unauthorized Disclosure of Confidential Information:

No public official or employee shall:

• Divulge, disclose, or use confidential or classified information known to them by reason of their office for personal advantage or for the benefit of others, unless authorized by existing laws, rules, regulations, or a competent authority.
• Leak or misuse sensitive or privileged information that may compromise public interest, security, or the integrity of administrative and investigative processes.

5.4 Abuse of Authority and Misuse of Public Resources:

Public officials and employees shall refrain from:

• Using their official positions to coerce, intimidate, or unduly influence other officials, employees, or private individuals.
• Misusing, misappropriating, or diverting public funds, properties, or resources for personal use or for purposes other than their officially designated intent.
• Allowing or tolerating unauthorized persons to utilize or benefit from public properties, vehicles, facilities, equipment, supplies, or personnel resources.

5.5 Engaging in Partisan Political Activities:

Public officials and employees are prohibited from:

• Using government time, personnel, facilities, equipment, or resources for campaigning or supporting any candidate, political party, or partisan political cause.
• Compelling or requiring subordinates, directly or indirectly, to participate in political campaigns, rallies, meetings, or contribute financial or other support to a political party or candidate.

5.6 Sexual Harassment and Misconduct:

It shall be unlawful for any official or employee to:

• Commit or tolerate any act or series of acts constituting sexual harassment, including unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, sexually offensive gestures, remarks, messages, or conduct that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
• Retaliate, threaten, intimidate, or discriminate against any individual who files a complaint or participates in an investigation regarding sexual harassment or misconduct.

5.7 Habitual Absenteeism, Tardiness, and Undertime:

No public official or employee shall:

• Incur unauthorized absences beyond the allowable leave credits or fail to report for work without justified cause.
• Habitually arrive late (tardiness) or leave work prematurely (undertime) without proper authorization, causing disruption or impairment of public service delivery.

5.8 Engaging in Unauthorized Business Activities:

Public officials and employees must not:

• Own, control, or engage in private enterprises regulated, supervised, or licensed by their respective office unless explicitly allowed by law.
• Engage in private practice of their profession or participate in employment or consulting activities which may directly conflict or tend to conflict with their official duties and responsibilities.

5.9 Nepotism and Favoritism:

It shall be prohibited to:

• Appoint, promote, or grant undue advantage or privilege to relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, except for confidential or co-terminous positions as explicitly allowed by law.
• Influence hiring decisions, promotions, or evaluations to unduly favor family members or relatives, thereby compromising meritocracy and fairness in public service.

5.10 Misrepresentation or Falsification of Documents:

No official or employee shall:

• Deliberately falsify, misrepresent, or forge signatures, records, reports, statements, time records, leave forms, or official documents required in their official functions.
• Alter or tamper with official documents or data with intent to deceive, defraud, conceal facts, or gain undue advantage.

SECTION 6. TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES

To strengthen transparency, promote accountability, and foster public trust, the following measures shall be strictly observed:

6.1 Mandatory Disclosure of Information:

• All public officials and employees shall annually submit their duly notarized Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN).
• Regular public disclosure of financial statements, project expenditures, and budget allocations must be made accessible via municipal bulletin boards, official websites, and other appropriate platforms.

6.2 Public Consultation and Participation:

• Significant policy decisions, programs, and projects shall undergo mandatory public consultations and hearings, ensuring meaningful participation by citizens and relevant stakeholders.
• Feedback mechanisms such as suggestion boxes, public forums, and online platforms shall be established to capture public opinions and recommendations.

6.3 Transparent Procurement and Transactions:

• Strict adherence to the New Government Procurement Reform Act guidelines for all procurement activities, with documentation of all bids and transactions made publicly available.
• Posting of bid opportunities, awards, and procurement results in conspicuous places and online portals accessible to the general public.

6.4 Regular Performance and Financial Audits:

• Periodic internal and external performance audits and financial reviews shall be conducted to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of municipal operations and expenditures.
• Audit reports and related documents must be published and made publicly accessible, detailing findings, recommendations, and corrective actions taken.

6.5 Citizen’s Charter:

• Establishment and maintenance of a Citizen’s Charter clearly outlining service standards, processes, fees, timelines, and responsible officers, prominently displayed in municipal offices and official online platforms.

6.6 Whistleblower Protection:

• Implement mechanisms to ensure protection and confidentiality for whistleblowers or individuals who report acts of corruption, unethical behavior, misconduct, or violations of this ordinance, as provided by applicable laws and regulations.

6.7 Information and Education Campaigns:

• Continuous conduct of ethical standards and integrity training programs, workshops, and seminars for all public officials and employees.
• Implementation of public awareness campaigns and dissemination of educational materials to inform citizens of their rights, privileges, and avenues for redress and participation.

6.8 Accountability Reporting:

• Heads of offices and departments shall regularly report to the Municipal Mayor and the Sangguniang Bayan, detailing their operational achievements, expenditures, challenges encountered, and corrective measures implemented.
• Annual accountability reports summarizing the municipality's overall performance and financial status shall be published and accessible to the general public.

SECTION 7. ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

The Office of the Municipal Mayor, through the Human Resource Management Office, in coordination with the Municipal Ethics Committee, shall ensure strict implementation and enforcement of this Ordinance.

SECTION 8. PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION

Any official or employee found guilty of violating this Ordinance shall, after due process, be subject to the following penalties: a. First Offense: Written reprimand; b. Second Offense: Suspension for not more than thirty (30) days without pay; c. Third Offense: Suspension for not less than six (6) months to one (1) year or dismissal from service, depending on the gravity of the offense.

These penalties shall be without prejudice to criminal or administrative actions provided under existing laws.

SECTION 9. IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS

The Municipal Ethics Committee, in coordination with the Municipal Human Resource Management Office, shall prepare and promulgate the necessary implementing rules and regulations within ninety (90) days from the effectivity of this Ordinance.

SECTION 10. FUNDING

Funding necessary for the implementation of this Ordinance shall be included in the annual appropriations of the municipality under the Municipal Mayor's Office.

SECTION 11. REPEALING CLAUSE

All municipal ordinances, executive orders, rules, and regulations inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

SECTION 12. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE

If any section or provision of this Ordinance is declared unconstitutional or invalid by competent authority, other sections or provisions not affected thereby shall remain valid and effective.

SECTION 13. EFFECTIVITY CLAUSE

This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation within the municipality or posting in conspicuous places within the municipality and barangay halls.

ENACTED BY THE SANGGUNIANG BAYAN OF [MUNICIPALITY NAME] THIS [DAY] OF [MONTH], 2025.

Certified Correct:
[NAME]
Secretary to the Sanggunian

Attested by:
[NAME]
Municipal Vice Mayor/Presiding Officer

Approved:
[NAME]
Municipal Mayor

The Media-Dynasty Nexus: Power and Democracy in the Philippines

by Alan S. Cajes

Power, Culture, and the Crisis of Representation

The entanglement of media and political dynasties in the Philippines is more than a matter of influence; it is a structural reality deeply embedded in the country's historical trajectory, cultural logics, and socio-political architecture. This convergence operates not simply through coercion or corruption but through the normalization of elite rule, the reproduction of patron-client relationships, and the orchestration of symbolic narratives.

Philippine polity inherited precolonial kinship-based governance, Spanish patronage structures, and American electoral tutelage—resulting in a hybrid political order where family-based power is both traditional and modern. It resonates with Filipino relational values such as utang na loob and pakikisama, reinforcing loyalty over ideology. However, it raises questions about truth, legitimacy, and the meaning of democratic representation.

Precolonial Power as Sacred Kinship

Before colonization, Filipino societies were governed by datus—local chieftains whose authority was grounded in kinship, warrior reputation, and ritual sanction. Leadership was relational and performative, rooted in a moral economy of reciprocity and embedded in the communal cosmology. The datu functioned as protector, priest, and provider, earning loyalty through visible acts of generosity and spiritual mediation. Genealogy conferred legitimacy, and authority was sacralized through myths of divine ancestry and ritual leadership.

This configuration of power—what anthropologists term a segmentary lineage system—continues to echo in contemporary Philippine politics. The symbolic role of the datu lives on in the modern mayor, governor, or senator who rules through personalism, charisma, and relational closeness rather than programmatic platforms.

Colonial Reinvention of Elites

The Spanish colonial state co-opted local leaders into the principalia, formalizing their authority as colonial middlemen. These native elites collected taxes, enforced conversion, and governed local populations on behalf of the Crown. Their power was reinforced by land grants, exemptions from tribute, and access to Western education. Thus began a fusion of indigenous authority with colonial patronage—an arrangement that institutionalized elite rule through hybrid forms of governance.

The American regime further restructured this system by introducing elections, public education, and legal institutions, but participation was limited to property-owning males—most of whom were already part of the ilustrado or landed elite. Elections became another avenue for elite reproduction. Political families emerged not despite colonial reforms, but because of them.

American Period and Electoral Capture

While promoting democracy in rhetoric, the American colonial regime ensured that political power remained with compliant elites. Electoral institutions were designed to showcase republican forms without altering colonial substance. Voting rights were restricted (for example, the Jones Law of 1916 included a provision under the Qualifications of Voters -- “Those who own real property to the value of 500 pesos, or who annually pay 30 pesos or more of the established taxes.”; political parties were clan-based; and public service was framed as privilege, not duty. The system facilitated the conversion of economic capital into political control, entrenching families who had gained prominence under Spanish rule.

Rather than undermine oligarchy, American reforms modernized it. Patron-client networks were embedded into democratic institutions. Local caciques brokered development funds and appointments in exchange for votes. Political authority became an inherited asset, transmitted through generations and legitimized through media visibility, academic credentials, and performance of care.

Post-Independence and the Reinvention of Dynastic Power

The transition to independence in 1946 did not disrupt elite rule; it deepened it. Prominent families captured the new institutions of statehood, portraying themselves as nationalist saviors while maintaining structural inequalities. The political arena became a space where families competed for dominance, often marrying into one another to consolidate power. The dominant political families represent not isolated cases, but an entrenched system, especially under Martial Law when centralized dynastic rule was elevated to imperial scale through crony capitalism, media propaganda, and cultural programming. The post-EDSA period restored electoral democracy, but failed to dismantle dynastic structures. Today, over 70% of Congress belongs to political families. Elections remain a form of elite circulation masked as popular choice.

Patronage, Kinship, and Moral Economies

Political loyalty in the Philippines is governed not only by law or ideology but by moral and relational codes. Utang na loob (debt of gratitude) and pakikisama (harmonious relations) create powerful incentives to support leaders who offer tangible aid, attend community rituals, and fulfill symbolic roles. Politicians are seen not just as public officials, but as familial figures—Ina ng Bayan, Ama ng Lalawigan, Anak ng Masa—who must be reciprocated with loyalty.

This moral economy legitimizes patronage. Acts of giving—be they sacks of rice, funeral expenses, or scholarship grants—are ritual affirmations of care. These practices foster emotional bonds and moral obligations, making political opposition appear as betrayal. Leadership is less about policy than proximity, less about ideology than intimacy.

Media as Mediator of Dynastic Power: From Visibility to Myth

Media does not merely cover political dynasties—it constructs them. From colonial newspapers to social media, the media ecosystem has helped political families transform themselves into cultural icons. Today, descendants of political families leverage YouTube, TikTok, and Facebook to brand or rebrand their image.

This shift from journalism to mythopoesis reflects philosopher Guy Debord’s society of the spectacle, where power is exercised through images and emotion rather than through reason. Media visibility becomes symbolic capital. Political campaigns mimic television dramas, and public memory becomes a battleground of aesthetics, emotion, and viral content. When the media is captured, truth becomes optional, and myth becomes political currency.

Symbolic Power and the Cultural Logic of Consent

Gramsci’s concept of hegemony helps explain why dynasties persist: not because people are forced, but because they consent—often unwittingly—to their rule. This consent is built through rituals, narratives, and affective ties that normalize elite power.

Bourdieu adds that dynasties convert various forms of capital—economic, social, cultural, and symbolic—into enduring advantage. Political families use wealth to fund campaigns, fame to court media, education to signal competence, and history to invoke legacy. Through habitus, citizens internalize these norms, making dynastic politics seem inevitable or even desirable.

The ultimate result is symbolic violence: the misrecognition of domination as legitimacy. When the public prefers name recall over platforms, when elections are won through spectacle rather than deliberation, democracy becomes ritualized compliance rather than participatory agency.

Postcolonial Memory and the Battle for Historical Truth

Digital disinformation capitalizes on postcolonial amnesia—an effect of fragmented education, English-centric historiography, and a state that has failed to institutionalize memory. Yet resistance persists: #NeverAgain campaigns, independent documentaries, digital archives, and survivor testimonies all fight to preserve the moral imagination of democracy.

What Happened to Political Parties?

In a healthy democracy, political parties are supposed to help voters make good choices. They’re expected to screen candidates, explain clear plans and beliefs, and support leaders who are capable and honest. But in the Philippines, political parties are weak. Instead of standing for ideas, many parties just follow personalities. Politicians jump from one party to another depending on what benefits them most—this is called turncoatism. Because parties don’t offer real guidance, voters often choose based on family name, popularity, or personal help received.

As a result, political dynasties have taken over the job that parties should be doing. Instead of focusing on ideas or policies, elections become popularity contests where powerful families almost always win.

Can New Leaders Win? The Hope for Alternative Politicians

While dynasties still dominate, there have been moments when alternative leaders—those outside big political families—have broken through. These politicians often come from civil society, the youth sector, labor unions, or local communities. Some are teachers, lawyers, or activists who built trust through community work instead of fame or fortune. They usually win when people are tired of old names and are hungry for honest, competent leadership. Social media and local organizing have helped some of them connect with voters directly, even without huge budgets. Their victories show that change is possible.

But it’s not easy to sustain. Without strong political parties to support them or enough funding, many face pressure to join traditional alliances just to survive. Some get co-opted into the system; others are sidelined after one term. This is why deeper reform is needed—not just to elect new leaders, but to protect them and help them grow.

The key to sustaining alternative leadership is consistent support from citizens, better access to campaign resources, fair media coverage, and civic education that values new ideas over big names.

Toward Cultural and Institutional Reform

Genuine reform requires both structural change and cultural transformation. Institutional reforms include:

·       Enacting an anti-dynasty law with teeth.

·       Reforming campaign finance laws.

·       Democratizing media ownership.

·       Supporting civic education and media literacy.

Culturally, reform demands rethinking values: elevating merit over name, public interest over kinship, and civic participation over passive consumption. Education must cultivate critical thinking, historical consciousness, and democratic ethics.

Grassroots movements, youth activism, independent media, and local innovation represent sites of democratic renewal. These movements embody what Enrique Dussel calls transmodern politics: grounded in the ethics of liberation, they resist hegemonic structures while prefiguring alternative futures.

Reclaiming Democratic Imagination

The nexus of media and dynastic power in the Philippines is not an anomaly—it is a product of history, culture, and systemic design. But it is not unchangeable. By confronting this nexus holistically,  we gain not only diagnosis but also insight into paths forward.

Democracy is not just about elections. It is about voice, memory, inclusion, and imagination. To break the hold of dynasties and reclaim democracy, Filipinos must not only reform institutions but transform consciousness. Only then can democracy move from ritual to reality.

---

References

Bourdieu, Pierre. Language and Symbolic Power. Harvard University Press, 1991.

Cannell, Fenella. Power and Intimacy in the Christian Philippines. Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Debord, Guy. The Society of the Spectacle. Zone Books, 1994.

Fricker, Miranda. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford University Press, 2007.

Galtung, Johan. “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research.” Journal of Peace Research 6, no. 3 (1969): 167–191.

Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books, 1973.

Gramsci, Antonio. Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers, 1971.

Habermas, Jürgen. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. MIT Press, 1989.

Hollnsteiner, Mary R. “Reciprocity in the Lowland Philippines.” Filipinas Journal of Anthropology 1, no. 1 (1965): 1–16.

Hobsbawm, Eric, and Terence Ranger, eds. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge University Press, 1983.

Mignolo, Walter D. The Darker Side of Western Modernity. Duke University Press, 2011.

Ricoeur, Paul. Memory, History, Forgetting. University of Chicago Press, 2004.

Scott, James C. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. Yale University Press, 1985.

Scott, William Henry. Barangay: Sixteenth-Century Philippine Culture and Society. Ateneo de Manila University Press, 1994.

Walzer, Michael. Spheres of Justice: A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. Basic Books, 1983.

Young, Iris Marion. Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford University Press, 2000.

Wolfe, Eric. Europe and the People Without History. University of California Press, 1982.

Why Filipinos Support Underperforming Politicians?

by Alan S. Cajes

Persistent electoral support for underperforming politicians in the Philippines reveals a web of sociocultural dynamics that extend beyond governance metrics. Rather than a simple failure of voter judgment, this phenomenon reflects deeply rooted historical patterns, cultural norms, and pragmatic decision-making shaped by structural constraints.

The Power of Personalism

At the heart of Filipino political culture is personalism—the privileging of personal relationships over impersonal systems. In this context, voters often evaluate politicians not on the basis of institutional performance but on the strength of personal interaction. Politicians who are highly visible in community events—attending funerals, weddings, and baptisms—or who provide immediate aid during crises, cultivate bonds that are emotional, reciprocal, and durable.

These interactions generate a powerful sense of utang na loob (debt of gratitude), which can outweigh abstract indicators such as poverty rates or audit reports. The relational nature of Filipino society thus incentivizes politicians to invest in personal visibility and patronage rather than long-term institutional reforms.

Family Politics and Dynastic Loyalty

The Philippine political system is heavily shaped by dynasties, with over 70% of legislators coming from political families. These dynasties often function as quasi-institutions, fostering enduring relationships with communities that span generations. Political allegiance, in many cases, becomes hereditary—voters support familiar names not necessarily because of proven competence, but because of long-standing bonds and a sense of communal belonging.

This dynastic continuity transforms political support into a surrogate of familial loyalty, where casting a vote feels like affirming one’s own kin rather than selecting the most qualified candidate.

Pragmatic Adaptation in a Flawed System

Many voters face a limited spectrum of viable choices, often constrained by weak party systems, the high cost of political entry, and the marginalization of reform-oriented candidates. In such an environment, political support may be less about ideological alignment or governance records and more about strategic survival. Voters rationally gravitate toward politicians who offer concrete, if uneven, benefits—jobs, financial aid, access to medical care—even if these come at the expense of broader reforms.

Far from being irrational, this behavior reflects a pragmatic calculus: when systemic change appears out of reach, voters prioritize the politician who provides for their immediate needs.

Visibility of Tangible Goods vs. Invisible Reforms

In communities grappling with poverty and daily insecurity, the most visible acts of governance—such as constructing basketball courts, distributing cash aid, or organizing medical missions—carry disproportionate weight. These acts offer instant, recognizable returns, while infrastructure reform, anti-corruption measures, or improved procurement processes often remain invisible or unintelligible to the average citizen.

The result is a skewed valuation system where performative politics eclipses substantive governance, reinforcing cycles of short-termism and dependency.

Historical Legacy and Political Expectations

The Philippines’ colonial past left behind governance systems that prioritized control and resource extraction over participatory governance and equitable service delivery. This legacy conditioned citizens to rely on personal intermediaries—such as local officials or political patrons—to access basic services, embedding a clientelist mindset in political life.

Rather than viewing the State as a rights-based provider, many Filipinos continue to see it as something navigated through relationships, obligations, and favors.

Pathways to Reform

Addressing this phenomenon requires interventions on both the supply and demand sides of politics. On the supply side, it means creating conditions for new, competent, and reform-minded leaders to emerge, supported by campaign finance reform, stronger party systems, and accountability mechanisms. On the demand side, it involves fostering a civic culture where performance and integrity matter more than patronage.

Civic education must be expanded and deepened to help citizens connect the abstract language of governance to the concrete realities of their lives. Transparent information ecosystems must be built to track and communicate political performance clearly and accessibly.

Rationality in Context

Filipino support for underperforming politicians should not be simplistically dismissed as irrational. Rather, it reflects an adaptive response to a political culture shaped by historical legacies, institutional weaknesses, and socioeconomic realities. Until these underlying conditions shift, personal loyalty and immediate gain will continue to trump governance metrics.

Meaningful reform, then, depends not only on changing who gets elected, but on transforming the very structures and norms that define how politics is understood and practiced in everyday life.

References for Further Reading

Abinales, P. N., & Amoroso, D. J. (2017). *State and Society in the Philippines* (2nd ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.

Casiple, R. C. (2016). "The Party-List System: Opportunities and Challenges for Democratic Expansion." In *Chasing the Wind: Assessing Philippine Democracy* (2nd ed.). Commission on Human Rights.

Coronel, S. S., Chua, Y. T., Rimban, L., & Cruz, B. B. (2007). *The Rulemakers: How the Wealthy and Well-Born Dominate Congress*. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.

Hedman, E. L. E. (2010). "The Politics of 'Public Opinion' in the Philippines." *Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs*, 29(4), 97-118.

Hutchcroft, P. D. (2000). "Colonial Masters, National Politicos, and Provincial Lords: Central Authority and Local Autonomy in the American Philippines, 1900-1913." *The Journal of Asian Studies*, 59(2), 277-306.

Kerkvliet, B. J. (2013). *Everyday Politics in the Philippines: Class and Status Relations in a Central Luzon Village*. Ateneo de Manila University Press.

Lande, C. H. (1996). *Post-Marcos Politics: A Geographical and Statistical Analysis of the 1992 Presidential Election*. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

McCoy, A. W. (Ed.). (2009). *An Anarchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines*. University of Wisconsin Press.

Mendoza, R. U., Beja Jr, E. L., Venida, V. S., & Yap, D. B. (2016). "Political Dynasties and Poverty: Evidence from the Philippines." *Asian Economic Papers*, 15(3), 63-98.

Querubin, P. (2016). "Family and Politics: Dynastic Persistence in the Philippines." *Quarterly Journal of Political Science*, 11(2), 151-181.

Sidel, J. T. (1999). *Capital, Coercion, and Crime: Bossism in the Philippines*. Stanford University Press.

Teehankee, J. C. (2018). "House of Clans: Political Dynasties in the Legislature." In *Philippine Politics: Possibilities and Problems in a Localist Democracy* (pp. 45-73). Routledge.

Choosing Honest Leaders: Your Guide to Understanding Good Governance

by Alan S. Cajes

What Is a Good Leader?

A good leader is not just someone who delivers speeches and makes promises. No—they are a guardian of trust, a servant of the people, and a champion of justice. A good leader:

· Places the people’s needs above their own

· Leads with honesty, fairness, and purpose

· Guards public resources as if they were sacred

· Wages war against corruption, without fear or favor

· Stands for all—not just the powerful few

The Heart of Good Leadership: Integrity and Ethics

What Is Integrity?

Integrity is the soul of leadership. It means:

· Telling the truth—especially when it's inconvenient

· Doing what’s right—even when no one is watching

· Keeping promises—not just making them

· Walking the talk—always

· Holding onto strong moral values like a lighthouse in the storm

 Ethical Leadership Means:

· Treating all people with fairness and dignity

· Refusing to exploit power for personal gain

· Being open, honest, and accountable

· Owning up to mistakes—and growing from them

· Upholding the rights and voices of everyone

The 10 Commandments of Good Governance

 1. Accountability

Great leaders face the people—they don’t hide. They answer tough questions, own their decisions, and welcome scrutiny.
Good Sign: They speak plainly, respond clearly, and take responsibility. 

2. Transparency
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Transparency is the light that reveals the truth.
Good Sign: You know what they’re doing, how they’re doing it, and why. 

3. Fighting Corruption
They don’t just reject corruption—they crush it.
Good Sign: They don’t flinch at cleaning up dirty systems and exposing the rot. 

4. Fair Representation
They are the voice of the many, not a mouthpiece for the few.
Good Sign: They listen, learn, and lead with empathy. 

5. Rule of Law
They are not above the law—they are its humble servant.
Good Sign: They respect human rights, follow due process, and treat everyone equally. 

6. Responsiveness
A true leader hears your cry—and answers it.
Good Sign: They don’t make excuses. They act. 

7. Strategic Planning
They see beyond tomorrow. Vision guides them, not impulse.
Good Sign: Their plans make sense, and they have the courage to follow through. 

8. Efficient Resource Management
They treat public funds as if every coin were their own—because it is.
Good Sign: Budgets that uplift, not enrich. Spending that reflects service, not self-interest. 

9. Participation and Inclusion
They don’t just speak—they listen. They don’t rule alone—they lead with you.
Good Sign: Community forums, diverse voices, real conversations. 

10. Continuous Improvement
They are not afraid to say, “I can do better.”
Good Sign: They evolve. They innovate. They rise after every fall.

Red Flags: Warning Signs of a Dangerous Leader

Beware the leader who:

· Promises the world but offers no path

· Surrounds themselves with cronies

· Bristles when questioned

· Blames, deflects, and deceives

· Hides truth behind closed doors

· Uses power for personal glory

· Bends the law to their will

· Divides instead of unites

How to Check a Leader’s Integrity

1. Listen Closely: Do they speak with clarity and courage? Can they explain their ideas simply? Do they admit what they don’t know?

2. Study the Past: What have they done when no one was watching? Have they walked their talk?

3. Watch Their Actions: Do they lead with compassion? Are their values reflected in what they do—not just what they say?

Your Power as a Voter

No leader is perfect. But the best ones strive. They learn. They listen. They serve.

So be bold. Ask questions. Seek truth. Talk to your neighbors.

Because your vote is your voice, your shield, your fire.

Final Wisdom

A good leader is not just a ruler—they are a guardian of hope, a defender of justice, a builder of futures. They rise not for themselves, but for us all.

So when you choose—choose integrity. Choose courage. Choose a leader who serves, not one who rules.

Because the future doesn’t just happen. It is chosen. By you.