The cacique in our midst

Benedict Anderson, in a 1988 article in the New Left Review titled,  “Cacique Democracy in the Philippines: Origins and Dreams,” talked about how Philippine state power was, and still is, captured by the feudal elite. The article predicted much of our disappointments with our government since the People Power Revolution. Anderson traced the historical roots of elite rule and noted that the People Power Revolution still ended up with the elite capture of state power.

Cacique, originally a Spanish word for tribal chieftains, took on a particular connotation during colonial times. These indigenous chiefs were coopted by the Spanish to serve as their local overseers. These coopted local elites were subservient to the Spanish but imperious towards the rest of the native population. As Anderson notes they became the feudal lords upon the defeat of Spanish colonialism in the Philippines.

However, while Anderson talked about a history of economic policies meant only to benefit the elite, we are seeing the bad effect of cacique elitism in the everyday conduct of society. We see it all the time. People who think that the ultimate accoutrement of wealth and power is to stop caring about those who have less while demanding subservience of them. 

Even those who come from the poor take on this attitude once they have made it to the top. Also, “wealth and power” can be quite relative. In this extremely hierarchical society, the lower middle class can behave like caciques, treating their poorer cousins badly.

Cheap copies

Private citizens can be left to their own evil ways as long as they don’t actually abuse people. At best they can be accused of poor taste. After all, if they insist on pretending they are royalty, they may as well read up on noblesse oblige. At worse, their reputations will suffer when their employees begin talking about their unkind and niggardly ways.

Janet Lim Napoles’ is a case in point. Rising from the ranks of the lower middle class, she amassed billions by helping politicians steal the people’s money. With so much money she could now become her true self. And that true self was expressed in the tasteless materialism of her baby girl, Jeanne. In contrast she made her staff at JLN Enterprises, some of them her relatives, work long hours for minimal pay, considering the unseemly amounts they were “earning” by stealing. 

That is perhaps what those who had wealth and power above her had done to her when she was on her way up. She was merely mimicking what she knows of how the wealthy and powerful behave in this country. She was asking of her inferiors to behave like she had when she was also poor and powerless. Notice how even now, her staff call her “Madam,” while detailing her very uncouth and unladylike thievery.

But this distancing from the poor and the expectation that they will serve, does its greatest damage when it manifests itself in the civil bureaucracy and in those professions asked to serve the general public. Here the egregious pretense that they serve the people whom they actually think should serve them, leads to maldevelopment and threatens our democracy. Here, the pretense at being pro-poor while actually using them for narrow personal and partisan interests poisons our politics. 

Indeed the cacique mentality invades even our social institutions. This rhetoric of being Christian and yet being unable to heed Christ’s message, “That which you do unto the least of my brethren you do unto me”, threatens the religious life of our people. 

Crude populism

We saw this in the Estrada presidency when “Erap Para Sa Mahirap” (Your pal is for the poor) was deployed to paint then candidate Joseph Estrada as one of the poor, derided by his wealthy enemies who were elitist. In truth, he was the errant son of a doctor who did not take full advantage of the opportunities given him to become a better person.

Recently, Senator Nancy Binay played the same populist card when she said of her father’s detractors, “Alam naman nilang maitim na kami, e gusto pa nila kaming tustahin. ” (They already know we are dark skinned and still they want to put us in the toaster.) Sounds wonderful until you recall how imperious she and her brother were to the guards in Dasmariñas.

At the very least we can tip our hats to the Binay publicists and to the Binay ability to obey the propaganda advice. How endearing are those claims about having our “first black Vice President.” How not endearing is this crude invocation of class war for their political interests.

MRT challenge

And now, we have all the heat generated by the challenge issued by netizens for transportation officials to ride our trains. This, to me, is a “duh” moment. You mean to say that those in charge of the trains don’t even know what conditions are like for those who ride it? It is one thing to be given the privilege of the busy executive, another to allow those privileges to make you uncaring about the people you are supposed to be serving.

The saddest thing of all is that, Department of Transportation and Communications Secretary Joseph Abaya  took the challenge and failed. He failed the challenge because he took the train in mid-afternoon and not during rush hour. He stayed in the less crowded first cabin for 30 minutes. He was accompanied by the manager of the MRT and did not have to stand in line just to buy a ticket. Worse, newspaper reports have him wondering what the fuss about the congested trains was all about.

Secretary Abaya case makes an interesting point regarding our cacique governance, actually. Before this I knew only one thing about him. I was told that he was one of the few members of the House of Representatives whose stance against the RH Bill was respected even by our RH champions. He had read the bill, understood the issues and had taken his stand not because he was playing to the bishops. He also seemed to have a reputation for honesty. 

My point is that the scourge that is our feudal culture is structural. It goes beyond well-meaning individuals like Secretary Abaya. How many times have we heard of progressives, nay even communists, living relatively privileged lives? 

Woe to the ordinary citizen

In barrios and towns across the country we find priests, allegedly the servants of God, living in opulence and expecting service from the people they are supposed to serve. In most of these parishes, poverty levels can be very high and the priest’s life of privilege is taken from the wages of the poor or charity better spent for the poor. 

In shops, airplanes, banks and offices everywhere the poor are treated with disdain by the people who are supposed to treat them with a semblance of caring. I have watched flight attendants patronize the poor OFW nanny they had to serve, bank clerks deal sternly with the itinerant vendor wanting to change money, government workers lose their temper with the ordinary citizen. 

Cacique mentality has a long history from the time of Spanish colonialization, as Anderson and other scholars have documented. It goes back to a time friars and carpetbaggers came to the country to control its wealth. That colonial exercise taught us that merit and righteousness was not rewarded by power and wealth. Power and wealth kept power and wealth to itself. Obeisance was rewarded and standing up for oneself was punished severely.

The problem continues as our country attempts to become a democracy even as it is burdened by the continuation of feudal relations because land reform remains an unfulfilled dream. The elite remain firmly in control of government and their children, whether deserving or not, take over from their mother or father or brother. Power and wealth rather than merit are the basis for more power and wealth. 

On the other hand, the disempowered continue in habits of subservience. They hope each day to find public servants who are kind, or seek someone they know in the bureaucracy who they know. They hardly expect that in a democracy, kindness should be the attitude of every public servant, at every level, towards each and every citizen.

Seeds of reform

And, in truth, there are indeed public servants who are kind to each and every citizen that comes their way.  We have numerous examples of poor people who learn from their marginalization and acquire the habits of solidarity. We see members of our upper class become true servants: doctors who uphold the dignity of the poorest of their patients; religious who live their vow of poverty; government officials who serve with utmost respect, especially those among their constituents who are most dispossessed. And we have those among government whose executive privileges do not stop them from having that basic human empathy that is the true source of democracy.

There are also citizens, like those who issued the challenge to Secretary Abaya and those who were incensed by the Dasmariñas incident. Perhaps many of these are the same ones who dignify every person they see with kindness.

I would not underestimate the power of these people and their small and disparate actions. They are the holders of a true counter-culture of democratic social relations. Such people and their actions serve as yet another important element in the struggle for social reform and genuine democracy that will not be won by our leaders, but rather, by an engaged citizenry. – Rappler.com

 

Sylvia Estrada-Claudio is a doctor of medicine who also holds a PhD in Psychology. She is Professor of the Department of Women and Development Studies, College of Social Work and Community Development, University of the Philippines. She is also co-founder and Chair of the Board of Likhaan Center for Women’s Health.