The recent Senate and House investigations into the previous administration's "war on drugs" have reignited concerns about accountability for its actions. Critics are particularly troubled by former President Duterte's unapologetic admission of maintaining a "death squad" to target specific groups, raising serious ethical and legal questions about his approach to justice, his interpretation of the rule of law, and his apparent disdain for human rights.
Duterte stated, “My mandate as president of the republic was to protect the country and the Filipino people. Do not question my policies, because I offer no apologies, no excuses. I did what I had to do, and whether you believe it or not, I did it for my country.” His defiance was evident as he walked into the hearing with a cane, often resorting to curses while addressing senators.
Supporters of Duterte are likely to cling to his message, interpreting it as a defense of his actions and framing his brutal methods as necessary for restoring order and the rule of law. They often downplay the grim reality of the estimated 12,000 to 30,000 killings between 2016 and 2019, suggesting that the victims were simply drug users or dealers, or even “collateral damage” in the pursuit of a quieter society.
Thus in this situation highlights a sociological phenomenon known as Dutertism, where staunch supporters rally around promises of a tough stance on crime and the need for peace and order, all while aligning with Duterte's ruralism and his vision of governance. To use José Luis López Aranguren, this phenomenon has turned policies, even a legacy into a 'way of life' for the people.
Introducing "Sociological Dutertism"
The concept of "sociological Dutertism" captures the intricate dynamics of public sentiment and social behavior influenced by former President Rodrigo Duterte's governance. His administration's policies, particularly the controversial war on drugs, have sparked widespread debate and reflection on the implications of authoritarianism, violence, and populism in Philippine society.
This article examines key elements of sociological Dutertism, including the possibility of "Tokhang denialism", the redirection of public focus to purported "positive" attributes of Duterte's governance, and a yearning for dictatorial leadership, while analyzing their broader sociocultural implications. Additionally, it explores the role of fake news as a coping mechanism for supporters navigating the complexities of Duterte’s presidency.
Tokhang Denialism
Cognitive Dissonance and Rationalization
The war on drugs, particularly Oplan Tokhang, has been marked by significant human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings. Supporters often engage in denialism to resolve the cognitive dissonance created by the contrast between their desire for safety and the violent means employed to achieve it. By minimizing or outright denying the existence of extrajudicial killings, they can uphold their belief that the campaign is fundamentally about protecting society from drug-related crime (Human Rights Watch, 2019).
This denialism is further reinforced by the framing strategies employed by the Duterte administration. Officials emphasize successes in crime reduction, showcasing statistics that reflect decreased drug-related incidents while sidelining reports of violence. As noted by Amnesty International, this selective emphasis enables supporters to maintain a narrative that rationalizes the brutality of the campaign (Amnesty International, 2017).
Sociocultural Implications of Denialism
The sociocultural implications of Tokhang denialism are profound. By fostering an environment where violence is normalized, denialism contributes to a culture of impunity, eroding trust in law enforcement and the judicial system. This erosion can have cascading effects, leading to decreased civic engagement and a general acceptance of authoritarian measures as legitimate responses to crime (Bacani, 2019).
Shifting Attention to "Positive" Attributes
Economic Narratives and Infrastructure Development
Supporters of Duterte frequently highlight initiatives like "Build, Build, Build," a massive infrastructure program aimed at stimulating economic growth. This focus serves not only as a distraction from the administration's violent policies but also as a means to create a narrative of progress and development. The framing of Duterte as a transformative leader resonates with many who view economic stability as a priority, often overshadowing discussions about human rights (Balisacan, 2020).
This strategic shifting of attention underscores a broader sociological phenomenon where citizens prioritize perceived economic benefits over civil liberties. As political analyst Richard Javad Heydarian points out, "Duterte’s ability to deliver infrastructure projects has allowed him to maintain a loyal base, despite mounting controversies" (Heydarian, 2020). This loyalty stems from a belief that tangible improvements in infrastructure can translate into enhanced quality of life, further justifying the administration's contentious actions.
Populism and Political Legitimacy
The populist rhetoric utilized by Duterte and his supporters plays a critical role in this attention shift. By framing the administration as a champion of the common Filipino, Duterte creates a narrative that positions his leadership as a necessary response to elite corruption and inefficiency. This rhetoric fosters a sense of belonging among supporters, who may perceive themselves as part of a broader movement for change. As sociologist Nicole Curato observes, this populist narrative often leads to the vilification of dissenters as enemies of progress, complicating discussions surrounding human rights and governance (Curato, 2017).
Yearning for Dictatorship
Historical Context and Authoritarian Nostalgia
A yearning for a dictatorial governance style is a prominent feature of sociological Dutertism. This sentiment can be traced to historical experiences of authoritarianism in the Philippines, where certain segments of the population associate strongman leadership with stability and order. For many, the perceived chaos of democratic governance fosters nostalgia for the more straightforward, albeit repressive, measures employed during the Marcos regime (Sison, 2018).
This nostalgia is often reinforced by a contemporary narrative that frames the return of authoritarian rule as a necessary evil in the face of rising crime rates and social unrest. Many citizens, particularly those who feel marginalized or threatened by criminality, may support authoritarian measures as a means to restore peace and order. This belief is frequently articulated in the context of security, where a strong leader is viewed as essential to effectively combat crime and restore public safety.
Collective Identity and Mobilization
The yearning for dictatorship is also accompanied by a strong sense of collective identity among Duterte’s supporters. Many feel empowered by their association with a leader who positions himself as a savior, creating a community that actively defends his administration's policies. This mobilization fosters a sociocultural identity that values strength and decisiveness over democratic norms. As political scientist David K. E. O. Lim argues, "The collective support for Duterte reflects a deeper societal longing for a decisive figure who can navigate the complexities of contemporary Philippine society" (Lim, 2019).
The Role of Fake News in Sociological Dutertism
The Acceptability of Fake News
For Duterte's supporters, the legitimacy of information often hinges on its alignment with their beliefs rather than its factual accuracy. Fake news that targets opposition figures or critics is frequently accepted without question, as it resonates with their worldview. This selective acceptance highlights a broader sociocultural phenomenon where emotional truths—feelings of safety, stability, and national pride—take precedence over objective reality. As Heydarian notes, "Supporters often create a narrative that absolves the administration of wrongdoing, viewing critical perspectives as attacks on their identity" (Heydarian, 2020).
Coping Mechanism and the Search for Positive Reception
The reliance on fake news serves as a coping mechanism for supporters navigating the complexities and controversies surrounding Duterte’s governance. By focusing on narratives that present the administration in a favorable light, they can shield themselves from the cognitive dissonance generated by conflicting information. This mechanism allows supporters to construct an idealized version of reality that emphasizes Duterte's accomplishments while downplaying human rights abuses and extrajudicial killings.
The preference for "positive receptions" is fueled by a collective desire for validation. In a society rife with polarization, supporters find comfort in narratives that affirm their beliefs and dismiss dissenting voices as elitist or out of touch. This dynamic creates an echo chamber where misinformation thrives, reinforcing a sense of community among supporters who view themselves as defenders of a "common man" against perceived elite corruption.
Downplaying Controversies Through Relatable Rhetoric
Supporters often downplay the administration’s controversial actions by framing them as typical responses from a "common man" or a provincial perspective. This narrative strategy humanizes Duterte, allowing supporters to relate to him as an ordinary citizen confronting the challenges faced by everyday Filipinos. Such relatability transforms contentious statements and actions into expressions of frustration rather than indicators of authoritarianism.
As Curato notes, "The rhetoric surrounding Duterte's actions often appeals to the shared experiences of many Filipinos, framing harsh measures as necessary for survival in a chaotic environment" (Curato, 2017). This framing provides a rationale for supporters, who may view aggressive policies as justified in the fight against crime and disorder.
Implications for Public Discourse and Democratic Norms
The acceptance of fake news as alternative facts among Duterte’s supporters poses significant challenges for public discourse and democratic norms in the Philippines. As misinformation becomes a pervasive tool for justifying controversial policies, the line between truth and falsehood blurs, complicating efforts to foster informed debate and accountability.
Moreover, this reliance on fake news contributes to a culture of distrust towards traditional media and institutions. Supporters may dismiss critical reporting as biased or part of a broader conspiracy against the administration, reinforcing their allegiance to Duterte and further entrenching societal divisions.
Implications of Sociological Dutertism
Human Rights Abuses and the Culture of Impunity
The implications of sociological Dutertism extend beyond immediate governance issues, with profound impacts on human rights and the rule of law. The normalization of violence and the acceptance of extrajudicial killings can create a culture of impunity where human rights abuses become systemic. The consequences are far-reaching, affecting not only the individuals targeted but also the broader societal trust in democratic institutions (Bacani, 2019).
As noted by the United Nations, the ongoing violations linked to the war on drugs contribute to a broader erosion of democratic principles, with potential long-term ramifications for governance in the Philippines (United Nations, 2019). The atmosphere of fear that arises from these dynamics can further stifle dissent, discourage civic engagement, and undermine efforts to promote accountability and justice.
Political Polarization and the Erosion of Democratic Discourse
Sociological Dutertism has also intensified political polarization in the Philippines. The fervent loyalty exhibited by Duterte's supporters often leads to the marginalization of dissenting voices, complicating efforts for constructive dialogue. As Curato emphasizes, "The polarized environment creates barriers to constructive public discourse, making it difficult to address the multifaceted challenges facing the nation" (Curato, 2017).
This polarization can entrench divisions within society, creating a chasm between supporters and detractors of the administration. In such an environment, calls for accountability and reform may be perceived as attacks on the administration, further exacerbating tensions.
Shaping Future Governance and Societal Norms
The legacy of sociological Dutertism poses challenges for future governance in the Philippines. If the normalization of violence continues, subsequent administrations may feel pressured to adopt similar hardline approaches to maintain public support. This could perpetuate a cycle of repression rather than fostering constructive solutions to complex social problems.
Moreover, the sociocultural dynamics associated with Duterte's presidency may shape societal norms around governance and authority. As citizens become accustomed to authoritarian measures as a legitimate response to crime, the expectations for democratic accountability may diminish, paving the way for future leaders to exploit similar sentiments (Bacani, 2019).
Conclusion
Sociological Dutertism reflects a multifaceted interplay of cognitive dissonance, denialism, populist rhetoric, and authoritarian nostalgia. The acceptance of fake news and alternative facts further complicates this landscape, enabling supporters to construct a reality that prioritizes loyalty and emotional truth over factual accuracy. Understanding this phenomenon is essential for addressing the sociopolitical landscape in the Philippines, particularly regarding human rights, governance, and public discourse. As the country grapples with the consequences of Duterte's policies, fostering an informed and critical dialogue about the true costs of such governance is crucial. Only through this understanding can the Philippines aspire to build a just and equitable society that prioritizes both security and human rights, ensuring a future where the lessons of the past inform the path forward.
References
- Amnesty International. (2017). “If You Are Poor, You Are Killed”: Extrajudicial Executions in the Philippines’ War on Drugs.
- Bacani, A. (2019). “The Costs of Duterte's War on Drugs: An Analysis of Human Rights Violations.” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 50(3), 445-460.
- Balisacan, A. (2020). “Duterte’s Economic Legacy: Infrastructure Development Amidst Controversy.” Philippine Journal of Economics, 59(1), 1-25.
- Curato, N. (2017). “Democracy in the Time of Duterte: Political Polarization in the Philippines.” Asian Journal of Political Science, 23(2), 89-102.
- Heydarian, R. J. (2020). “The Duterte Administration: A Political Analysis.” Philippine Political Science Journal, 41(1), 5-22.
- Human Rights Watch. (2019). “They Just Kill”: Ongoing Human Rights Violations in the Philippines’ “War on Drugs.”
- Lim, D. K. E. O. (2019). “The Collective Identity of Duterte Supporters: Navigating Complexity in Contemporary Philippine Society.” Philippine Studies, 67(3), 325-342.
- Sison, J. (2018). “Historical Context of Authoritarianism in the Philippines.” Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints, 66(3), 361-375.
- United Nations. (2019). “Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in the Philippines.”