The Philippines’ long democratic experience has been remarkably free of deeply politicized cleavages. Roman Catholicism as a hegemonic religion prevents religious polarization, ethnic identity fragmentation limits ethnic polarization, and weak parties forestall ideological or class polarization. Nevertheless, the country suffered a crisis of polarization during the short-lived Estrada presidency (1998–2001) and that of his successor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (2001–2010). The severe conflict was a product of power maneuvers by anti-Estrada forces, followed by anti-Arroyo actors returning the favor, given her gross abuses of power. Echoing Machiavelli’s famous distinction, the conflict pitted Estrada’s popoli (the many) against Arroyo’s oligarchic grandi (the few). This Machiavellian conflict ended with an oligarchic reassertion of Madisonian democratic rule through the electoral victory of Benigno Simeon Aquino III in 2010. We conclude the article by considering whether the populist challenge of current president Rodrigo Duterte (2016– ) might spark a similarly destabilizing conflict in the years to come.
AbinalesPatricio N.AmorosoDonna J.2006. The withering of Philippine democracy. Current History696:290–5.
2.
AndersonBenedict. 1998. Cacique democracy in the Philippines: Origins and dreams. New Left Review169 (3): 3–31.
3.
ArugayAries A.2017. The Philippines in 2016: The electoral earthquake and its aftershocks. In Southeast Asian affairs, eds. CookMalcolmSinghDaljut, 277–96. Singapore: ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute.
4.
ArugayAries A.2004. Mobilizing for accountability: Contentious politics in the anti- Estrada campaign. Philippine Sociological Review52:75–96.
5.
ArugayAries A.2005. The accountability deficit in the Philippines: Implications and prospects for democratic consolidation. Philippine Political Science Journal26 (49): 63–88.
6.
BermeoNancy. 2003. Ordinary people in extraordinary times. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7.
BoudreauVincent. 2009. Elections, repression and authoritarian survival in post- transition Indonesia and the Philippines. Pacific Review22 (2): 233–53.
8.
CoronelSheila S.1999. Lords of the press. I: The Investigative Reporting Magazine5 (2).
9.
DavidRandolf S.2001. Erap: A diary of disenchantment. In Between fires: Fifteen perspectives on the Estrada crisis, ed. DoronilaAmando, 148–79. Pasig: Anvil Publishing, Inc.
10.
De DiosEmmanuel S.2001. Corruption and the fall. In Between fires: Fifteen perspectives on the Estrada crisis, ed. DoronilaAmando, 43–61. Pasig: Anvil Publishing, Inc.
11.
De LeonCedricDesaiManaliTugalCihan, eds. 2015. Building blocs: How parties organize society. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
12.
DoronilaAmando. 2001. The fall of Joseph Estrada: The inside story. Pasig: Anvil Publishing Inc.
13.
GarridoMarco. 2008. Civil and uncivil society symbolic boundaries and civic exclusion in metro Manila. Philippine Studies56 (4): 443–65.
14.
GillsBarryRocamoraJoel. 1992. Low intensity democracy. Third World Quarterly13 (3): 501–23.
15.
Grzymala-BusseAnna. 2015. Nations under God: How churches use moral authority to influence policy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
Grzymala-BusseAnnaSlaterDan. 2018. Making Godly nations: Church-state pathways in Poland and the Philippines. Comparative Politics50 (3): 545–64.
17.
HedmanEva-Lotta E.2001. The spectre of populism in Philippine politics and society: Artista, masa, eraption!South East Asia Research9 (1): 5–44.
18.
HernandezCarolina G.2001.Reflections on the role of the military in people power 2. In Between fires: Fifteen perspectives on the Estrada crisis, ed. DoronilaAmando, 67–77. Pasig: Anvil Publishing, Inc.
19.
HutchcroftPaul. D.2008. The Arroyo Imbroglio in the Philippines. Journal of Democracy19 (1): 141–55.
20.
HutchcroftPaul D.RocamoraJoel. 2003. Strong demands and weak institutions: The origins and evolution of the democratic deficit in the Philippines. Journal of East Asian Studies3 (2): 259–92.
21.
JansenRobert. 2011. Populist mobilization: A new theoretical approach to populism. Sociological Theory29 (2): 75–96.
22.
LeeTerence. 2009. The armed forces and transitions from authoritarian rule explaining the role of the military in 1986 Philippines and 1998 Indonesia. Comparative Political Studies42 (5): 640–69.
23.
LinzJuan J.StepanAlfred. 1996. Problems of democratic transition and consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
24.
MendozaAmadoJr.2009. “People Power” in the Philippines, 1983–86. In Civil resistance and power politics: The experience of non-violent action from Gandhi to the present, eds. RobertsAdamAshTimothy Garton, 179–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25.
MichelsRobert. 1962. Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchic tendencies of modern democracy. New York, NY: Collier Books.
26.
MydansSeth.5February2000. Expecting praise, Filipinos are criticized for ouster. New York Times.
27.
O’DonnellGuillermoSchmitterPhilippe C.1986. Transitions from authoritarian rule: Tentative conclusions about uncertain democracies. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
28.
QuimpoNathan. 2015. Can the Philippines’ wild oligarchy be tamed? In The Routledge handbook of Southeast Asian Democratization, ed. CasWilliam, 335–50. London: Routledge.
29.
ReyesRicardo B.2001. People power comes into the new millennium. Political Brief9 (2): 1–30.
30.
RiveraTemario C.2001. The middle classes and democratization in the Philippines: From the Asian crisis to the ouster of Estrada. In The Southeast Asian Middle classes: Democratization and social change, ed. EmbongAbdul Rahman, 230–61. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
31.
RocamoraJoel. 2007. From regime crisis to system change. In Whither the Philippines in the 21st century? eds. SeverinoRodolfoSalazarLorraine Carlos, 18–42. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
32.
RocamoraJoel. 1994. Breaking through: The struggle within the Communist Party of the Philippines. Pasig: Anvil Publishing, Inc.
33.
SchafferFrederic Charles. 2008. The hidden costs of clean election reform. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
34.
SchockKurt. 2005. Unarmed insurrections: People power movements in nondemocracies. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
35.
SlaterDan. 2013. Democratic careening. World Politics65 (4): 729–63.
36.
SlaterDanArugayAries A.2018. Polarizing figures: Executive power and institutional conflict in Asian democracies. American Behavioral Scientist62 (1): 92–106.
37.
SteinbergDavid Joel. 1982. The Philippines, a singular and a plural place. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
38.
ThompsonMark R.2008. People power sours: Uncivil society in Thailand and the Philippines. Current History107 (712): 381–87.
39.
ThompsonMark R.2004. Democratic revolutions: Asia and Eastern Europe. London: Routledge.
40.
ThompsonMark R.1995. The anti-Marcos struggle: Personalistic rule and democratic transition in the Philippines. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
41.
TimbermanDavid G.1991. A changeless land: Continuity and change in Philippine politics. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
42.
TolosaBenjamin T.2009. Framing the challenges of political empowerment and engagement: Ideational interventions for democratization since 2005. In Agenda for hope: Democratizing governance, eds. RodriguezAgustin Martin G.LacandulaTeresita Asuncion M., 49–75. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.
43.
WintersJeffrey. 2011. Oligarchy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
44.
YoungbloodRobert. 1990. Marcos against the church: Economic development and political repression in the Philippines. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
