Populist tactics

"Has change come, really?"

At around the time of President Rodrigo Duterte’s ascent into office in 2016, the term populism seemed to have simultaneously entered popular lexicon. As the term implies, the idea of “the people” is central to the word’s definition in political science. In Populism: A Very Short Introduction, Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser argue that populism is broadly the idea that society can be separated into two groups at odds “with one another: ‘the pure people’ and ‘the corrupt elite’”.

By positioning himself squarely as representative of the “unified” people’s will, the populist leader proceeds to vilify and set his sights on a singular enemy, characterized—often simplistically—as the one source of a society’s myriad problems and which must therefore be vanquished by whatever means possible.

The phenomenon represented by Duterte’s rise is, in many ways, a textbook example of such a figure. Despite an endless stream of controversial after controversial statements that target sacred institutions like the Roman Catholic Church and beleaguered sectors like human rights defenders and indigenous peoples, Duterte continues to enjoy what is, for all intents and purposes, a robust popularity.

A Pulse Asia survey conducted in the last quarter of 2018 pegged his satisfaction rating at 74 percent, an impressive mark by any measure but even more impressive coming nearly halfway into his term. Interestingly, his line of thinking has been able to elicit support even from very specific demographics such as overseas Filipino workers and the emerging middle class.

Populism might help explain why. Duterte’s presidential campaign had characterized him as a firebrand “political outsider” who can empathize with the ordinary Filipino’s sentiment and will thus fight with their interest in mind, often against the long-entrenched political elite. Even the financing of his campaign, despite being bankrolled by traditional businessmen and tycoons, was made out to be a grassroots effort.

Duterte also tapped into a deep anxiety that Filipinos had about security, peace and order, and crime. Leveraging on the popular (but doubtful) image of Davao City as safe and efficient, his campaign stressed his “tough stance on crime” vis-a-vis his unorthodox brand of leadership. His overriding campaign slogan— “Change is coming”—is thus anchored on overturning a status quo that many Filipinos had, for so long, felt as exclusive and unequal.

More than two years into office, however, Duterte’s report card is mixed at best, with some promises fulfilled and others broken.

Broken were his vows to eradicate drugs and widespread criminality within three to six months, to end labor contractualization, and to distribute coco levy funds within his first hundred days in office. The grand gestures involving jet skis that he had promised to do to assert Philippine sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea had also not materialized.

On the other hand, Duterte stayed true to his promise of increasing the salaries of uniformed personnel and upgrading military logistics equipment. Congress, teeming with his allies, passed pieces of radical-sounding legislation: Free Tertiary Education, Free Irrigation Service, Universal Health Care.

Despite some apprehensions about the sustainability of the measures, especially alongside the already ambitious and costly P8-trillion infrastructure program, these laws indeed bear the hallmark of a populist leadership.

This is the context in which the 2019 midterm election is going to be contested. The official campaign period is due to begin on February 12, and early surveys reveal that voters are likely to vote for candidates who are either re-electionists, former senators, or those who come from known political clans. Those who are allied with Duterte also seem to enjoy some advantage. This means that we continue to feel the reverberations of the populist wave that propelled a figure like Duterte to Malacañang.

But the chinks in his armor are beginning to show, which those proposing an alternative can take advantage of. Another recent Pulse Asia survey identifies the following as the top national concerns for Filipinos: controlling inflation, increasing wages, reducing poverty, and creating jobs. Their personal concerns meanwhile relate to health, education, victimization of crime, and access to jobs.

This is hardly surprising given how difficult 2018 has been for the Filipino consumer. Despite easing toward the end of the year, inflation hit near-decade highs even as job creation and wages remained stagnant. Measures such as the campaign to end labor contractualization had failed to bring wide-ranging relief.

With Duterte’s victory still fresh in people’s minds, the challenge then for opposition candidates is to present a decisive political agenda that not only exposes the key failures of the incumbent’s approach but also forwards robust alternatives. Senatorial candidates no doubt recognize the primacy of “gut issues,” such as food, health, and education, when Filipinos go to the polls. Taking a page from the Duterte playbook, many will focus on populist strategies to get as many votes as possible, from proposing radically transformative policies such as federalism or constitutional change to simplifying otherwise complex problems just to get votes.

Opposition candidates must not fall into the same trap. One approach, for instance, may take off from a leadership that prioritizes human rights, truly effective governance, and respect for international law—chinks in Duterte’s popularity and aspects in which the current government has been criticized. It is key is to expose the truth that behind the Duterte brand of leadership—and all populist leaders all over the world—is actually fictitious, a “spin.”

Those seeking to offer an alternative to Duterte must emphasize that populist tactics are precisely that: tactics. They must then stress that electoral contests are an opportunity to either reproduce or challenge an existing status quo. A good first step is to take off from the overarching promise of the Duterte campaign three years ago— “Change is coming.” Opposition candidates can thus begin by asking: “Has it, really?"