When democracy decays and recedes

Francis Fukuyama in his 2018 international bestseller Identity, about his take on political institutions, wrote that the state, rule of law and democratic accountability originated and evolved, and later on interacted with one another only to decay over time. Broadly consistent with Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson’s theory in Why Nations Fail, Fukuyama demonstrated how US institutions “were decaying as the state was progressively captured by powerful interest groups and locked into a rigid structure that was unable to reform itself.”

Fukuyama described Donald Trump as the product and a contributor to that decay. As an outsider, he won the presidency and promised to employ his popular mandate to make America great again through his America First policy.

But his policy, anchored on economic nationalism, actually reduced the perimeter of US economic trade and finance, and insularized its politics and economics. He was a populist in that he used the legitimacy of his political office secured by a democratic election to wield power. In the process, he weakened the institution of checks and balances, the hallmark of a democracy. Civil courts, Congress, independent media and professional bureaucracy were effectively emasculated.

For Fukuyama, who also wrote the more popular The End of History and the Last Man (1992) and Political Order and Political Decay: From the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy (2014), the former US president can be ranked with Vladimir Putin of Russia, Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and yes, Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines.

Quoting his colleague Larry Diamond’s Facing Up to the Democratic Recession (2015), Fukuyama observed that in 1970, there were only about 35 electoral democracies. By the early 2000s, the number had reached nearly 120 following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of democracy across Eastern Europe. By mid-2000s, there was a reversal of democracy, and authoritarianism held sway especially with the coming of age of Beijing and the reversion to strong-man rule in Moscow.

It should be no exclamation for us that the greatest surprises for Fukuyama are first, Britain’s decision to exit from the European Union and second, Trump’s victory in the 2016 election.

Are we seeing democracy decaying in the Philippines?

If we go by Fukuyama’s proposition that democracy decays when the institution of the state is progressively captured by powerful interest groups, yes, with a plus. For one, fat and thin dynasties have proliferated, appropriating for themselves both local and national elective and appointive positions. It’s a cruel joke but true that Philippine elections are nothing but a recycling game. When the parents have maximized their tenure in public office, the children are then mobilized to run in their place. A recent phenomenon is several whole families running together like a complete political ticket, a full court press, if we will. We see the same surnames from governor to vice governor to congressman in some provinces. It’s no different in the cities. The father runs for mayor, the son for vice-mayor and the younger children for councilor or congressman. No, they can’t wait for their turn. Three years is too long. And as we are beginning to see in the national scene, even the Senate has become a family affair.

Competence aside, when powerful and moneyed families dominate politics, we lose the essence of democracy. Politicians can argue that they have the skills and the experience, and when relatives take turns at governance, there is greater stability. But what about checks and balances?

There are also signs of decay when big corporates support politicians’ run for strategic public offices like the president of the republic, or senator or member of the House of Representatives. People in these positions decide on official public policy including the budget, and which infrastructure projects will be funded. Supporting politicians could be the best investment for business. It would be difficult to monetize access to Malacañang, which appoints key officials in Agriculture, Finance, Public Works or Transportation, but it must be without doubt priceless.

Democracy could also decay when the poor electorates seem to have no other candidates to choose from except ex-convicts, comedians and actors who have become household names. Democracy decays when those who are highly qualified would rather stay on the sidelines rather than run for public office. It’s one’s choice and therefore some could blame neither of them. But when the odds are against running with an actionable platform of government but with feeble resources, it is not fair. Democracy could hardly thrive in such condition.

Which brings us to the plus, the moral dimension of democracy.

Evidence shows that the liberal democracy that we know today has not benefited most of us. In the Philippines alone, poverty remains elevated even as some measures show some mitigation in recent years. Income inequality continues to be serious, with only a small fraction of the population sharing in more than 90% of gross domestic output. Unemployment and underemployment have left millions of people without access or limited access to livelihood. The Global Financial Crisis of 2008-2009, the debt crisis in Europe and recently, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the worst in liberal democracy. As Fukuyama argued, “since the United States and EU were the leading exemplars, these crises damaged the reputation of liberal democracy as a whole.”

Such a situation has not produced some recognition of human dignity. There is democratic recession when recognition of human dignity is confined only to the few, moneyed, politically empowered individuals who could, and actually do, exercise control over democratic institutions like election and appointment, grant of licenses and franchises, or even the budget process itself.

When this happens, the likelihood of the political and economic system getting reformed is very remote.

Democracy decays when people witness mass vote-buying in favor of incompetence and corruption, or when election results are clearly tampered with because those who do it are in positions of authority. This sabotage of democracy happens at the national level, down to the barangay level. This is one reason why banks are extremely busy during election time, servicing withdrawals of cold cash by politicians. And politicians can get away with it. Those who voted differently must have felt violated.

Democracy decays when licenses or franchises to operate public utilities or media outfits can easily be revoked as a matter of political revenge. Or awarded as a matter of political payback. Effective delivery of services no longer counts, what matters is whom they gave the most exposure and the air time consumed. Never mind those workers who were laid off, ending up as collateral victims to this modern vendetta. This is another form of assault to human dignity.

Democracy decays when the budget process favors one lawmaker and discriminates against another; it means some groups of people, some provinces or some cities get relatively more than the rest. In the first place, why should lawmakers be involved in identifying and funding projects based on their close connection to the party in power? That is the job of the Department of Budget and Management in coordination with local governments’ inputs through the regional development councils. This is the kind of budget process that leaves schools with fewer classrooms, textbooks and teachers; hospitals with fewer hospital beds, medicines and medical staff; and provinces and islands with no connectivity to the rest of the country. This is hardly the way to develop human capital and attain quality economic growth.

When democracy fades and recedes, it means there is little respect for human dignity as embodied in individual rights, the rule of law, the right to education and health. But as Fukuyama reminded us, such is never desirable. It was the same issue that sparked the French Revolution and similar popular movements including the Tunisian revolt and Tahrir Square uprising in recent years. With social media and the internet, these possibilities are not remote.

Which is why, the real-time coverage of the congressional hearing on the POGO controversy, extrajudicial killings and official admission of guilt, could foment another episode of asserting human dignity in the Philippines.

Diwa C. Guinigundo is a former deputy governor for the Monetary and Economics Sector of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). He served the BSP for 41 years. In 2001-2003, he was alternate executive director at the International Monetary Fund in Washington, DC. He is a senior pastor of the Fullness of Christ International Ministries in Mandaluyong.