Barangay Resilience as a basis for Philippine

Governance and Fostering Development

AHLLEN REM G. TANAEL

Development

Guide Questions:

 Is it more effective to look into historical roots to rediscover a system

Upon the arrival of the Spanish colonizers, the early Filipinos have already

had an effective system of governance called the barangay. This so called

barangay is derived from the word balangay, a kind of plank sail boat that was

used by these early Filipino people to travel along bodies of water. Such

communities are settlements are commonly found alongside bodies of water from

which where they get their resources from. These barangays operates as well-

organized independent villages with a population around fifty to one hundred

families.

This early community have their own social structures generalized as Datu,

the ruler, Maharlika, the nobles or the rich people, and the Alipin, who were

categorized either as commoners or freemen and slaves. This early Filipino

community, is headed by a chieftain or in local term, a Datu. The Datu holds a

judiciary power, as he acts as an arbiter when there are conflicts within the

community. Such datu also holds an executive and legislative powers as he can
lead his troupes into battle and make rules that should be obeyed by his

constituents.

The Barangay community was prevalent in the whole archipelago until the

Spaniards took over the archipelago through their God, Gold, and Glory principle.

They conquered these communities and fed them Catholicism. Such conversion

from paganism to Catholicism made it easier for the Spaniards to take their lands

and enslave the natives for their own benefit. These small and clustered barangays

were combined to form towns.

From then on, this system that gathered the indigenous people’s lands and

made it to be owned by what we know now as the feudal lords would still prevail

up until these modern days. This feudal system gave birth to an oppressed society

that are deprived of the rights to their own ancestral lands for those were forcibly

taken away by those acting lords. The incomes from these plain fields would’ve

been put into the hands of those who rightfully owned them, the indigenous people,

for their own benefit and would’ve been used as a tool for their progress but instead

they were abused by these selfish lords, thieves that used those lands for the

improvement of their riches and powers.

The Barangay Resilience

It is false to claim that the Philippine precolonial society is uncivilized as to

what was engraved to the minds of young Filipinos. To be uncivilized is to not be

considered to be socially, culturally, or morally advanced. Back then, the early

guidance to for their daily lives. They even had an established writing system, an

example of this is the commonly known baybayin. They have these so called

babaylan that served as the political advisers and spirit guides that connects the

spirit world to the human world but were hugely demonized during the Spanish

colonial period to turn people away towards Catholicism. They have a social

stratification that defines the classes of the people based on their economic wealth.

But most of all, they have an established government system that theoretically, if

it were not disturbed by the colonizers, it could be where we would’ve derived the

kind of governance we could be having on the present times.

The barangay system is a clear manifestation of an authoritarian style of

governance. The datu or the ruler of the land holds all the power and shall pass it

over to his successor. However according to Renato Constantino (1975), the datu

was not an absolute ruler and his scope of power is limited by a traditional body of

customs and procedures. Such government have a set of elderly people and

babaylans that serves as the political advisers of the datu on making his duty to

the community as effective as possible. Not only there were laws but they also

have a set of punishments as well. This barangay system is an established system

of governance in many aspects. It was an effective system of governance that

works effectively until it was wrecked effectively too, by the Spaniards.

Upon the transformation of these small clustered barangays to towns, lands

were also gathered from the natives. Lands owned by the natives from time

immemorial were forcibly taken away by Spanish colonizers through an

corrupted the lands and claimed the goods for the benefit of their own and really

harm the natives residing there.

Values Negatively Gained

Such system that prevailed during the Spanish colonization era continued

up until the present time and it turned even more disturbing as time went on. It

gave birth to different values such as the padrino system, or patronage. This is

exhibited when one person gains favor, promotion, or political appointment through

nepotism or family affiliation, or cronyism or friendship, as opposed to one’s merit.

Such padrino system is still over prevailing today. This is exhibited in political

dynasties where families take over a certain town or region and use its resources

to further expand their power and riches. An example of this is of the Marcos era

where his cronies benefitted greatly from the corruption that have happened during

this era.

Religiousness could be a hindrance to the development as well. As they

became more God fearing, they also became fearful of things that might bless

them with progress. As Catholic countries alike progress when it comes to policies,

the religious institutions in the Philippines still have a say on what should be

implemented or not. This means that the religious institutions work well as political

institutions too. Or this could mean that the religion is not well-fitting with the

Filipino values.
 Another value is that the Filipinos greatly treasure their family values.

Filipinos are naturally family oriented. Everyone from the grandparents even down

to the apos are stereotypically close and is involved with anyone’s game. Maybe

this is why political dynasties are really predominant in the Philippine setting. An

image of perfect families effectively garners the trust of the masses. Being family

oriented is not a bad thing however if it is perceived in a Philippine political setting,

the numbers shows that the poorest places in the country reeks of political dynasty.

The Current State

Literally defined as “rule by the people,” according to the Merriam-Webster

Dictionary, Democracy is a government in which the supreme power is vested in

the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of

representation usually involving periodically held free elections. It is also commonly

characterized as holding a competitive and inclusive elections. The citizens select

through a pool of candidates whom they are delegating the governmental powers

to for the local and national branches of the government. These elected officials

were to be recognized as their representatives that would cater to the needs of the

citizenry.

However, one failure that can be pointed out with this kind of governing

system is that these elected representatives are from the elite and they are getting

elected over and over again. Such Elites have been dominating the Philippines

rooting back from the Spanish Era. These wealthy families have acquired masses
of land and earned them power in their localities. Since the Spanish Era and

especially during the American colonization period, these wealthy elites were able

to grab seats in the government from which they have used to improve their power.

This proves that the current Philippine political order highlights particularism,

patron-client relations and frequent recourse to coercion by elite political families

(Pinches, 1997).

Democracy in the Philippines was overly benefitting for the 1% at the top of

the pyramid but the masses are still starving. The Philippines is not a business to

be shared and be fought over with. This democracy where only the few benefits,

we should take a look at new perspectives. The Philippines' neighboring countries

are not democratic, yet they have a better economy and are well operating.

Democracy from the west may not work well in our region maybe because we

should’ve been taking the steps of our neighboring countries.

What’s to be done? Root back.

During tribal wars, the winning tribe enslaves the losing tribe. This is a

manifestation of the richness of the Philippine precolonial culture. Upon after the

revolution, to trace back into the resilience of the precolonial Filipinos that

managed to build their own community, this could mean that even without the help

of the Americans who “helped” the Filipinos achieve their democracy and

sovereignty, the Filipinos would still be able to rebuild and govern themselves on

their own.
 If democracy gave birth to an unhealthy values that continuously harms the

progress of the Filipino people, maybe it is not the type of governance we should

be having. The Philippines’ neighboring countries in the Southeast Asia are

predominantly authoritarian and those countries are striving when it comes to

development. It is not because of authoritarianism being more effective in the

sense of progress, but maybe it is because of these countries having a feature of

authoritarianism really fits their community and their values. Maybe

authoritarianism helps them progress because if you traced it back on their history,

these values are present into their culture and even back then, such values have

had a share on their progress as a community.

In fostering development, the democracy in the Philippines is marred with a

bloody elite rule. The elites hold the power through policies that favors their interest

instead of being pro-masses, as how it should be. There are agrarian reform laws

being published that are falsely implemented leaving nothing for the farmers who

rightfully owned the lands they are tilling on. Laws that would make it easier for

foreigners to import goods that could easily be sold on a low price because the

tariff is lowered or even stripped. An example of this is the recent rice tarrification

law that is signed by President Rodrigo Duterte earlier this month. With such policy

being implemented, the farmers would have a hard time selling their goods added

to the burden of the TRAIN law that makes the prices of goods higher. Such

policies makes it difficult for the masses to develop especially when it is elite-

centric.
 In Southeast Asia, the poorest of the countries have democracy while the

richest have authoritarian rule. To look into an alike perspective with our

neighboring countries, some have fostered development through means of having

a single strongman holding the power and leading the country. According to the

Lee-thesis which is attributed to the former prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan

Yew, an authoritarian setting, greatly many people are being denied of political

liberty and basic civil rights. With the denial of these rights, can be associated with

good economic growth. If such authoritarianism is more effective in fostering

development, the question now would be, should democracy and the attainment

of liberties could only be attained upon reaching a certain level of development is

achieved?