GROUP 03

State and Society

in the Process of
Democratization
By: Jose Magadia S.J.
Analyzed and Presented by:
John Paul H. Hernales

1
 GROUP 03

WHA
T
DOE
S IT
IMPL
Y?

2
 GROUP 03

Breakdown of authoritarian regimes in 1980s ,

led to the resurgence of democratic rule
3
 GROUP 03

The Aftermath of EDSA PP 1

State and Society actors have come
together to form and implement policy,
lay out plans for contingencies, bargain
for redistribution of resources, provide
auxiliary services, run programs for
education, agree on terms, of
negotiation, negotiate on the settlement
of disputes and others Jose Magadia
4
 GROUP 03

What is the most significant

Philippine event in 1986?
The
legislation of
the 1987
Constitution
which is the
basis of all
laws and
policy today.
5
 GROUP 03

State and Society

actors have come to
form immediate
policies
6
 GROUP 03

Society Actors

7
 GROUP 03

Society Actors
Also known as Societal Actors are
conscious, thinking, individuals or
collectives who has the capacity to
shape their world in a variety of ways
by reflecting on their situation and the
choices available to them at any given
time.

8
 GROUP 03

Society Actors
Participation are significantly
manifested on the level of local
government and in the
implementation phase of the policy
making.
It is possible to expand their
influence up to the level of national
policy making.
9
 GROUP 03

State Actors

10
 GROUP 03

State Actors
Are individuals or collectives
who is acting in behalf of the
state. In short they are
politicians and government
staffs.
In the Philippines they are
referred to as an Elite Domain
11
 GROUP 03

Democratizing State

12
Democracy as Ideology.
Prior to actual transition, a renewed understanding,
redefinition, and reevaluation of democracy took
place in many authoritarian-ruled developing
countries. This is part of what Chalmers et al. (1997)
speak of as political learning, undergone by those
who led the opposition against authoritarian rule,
and who subsequently assumed leadership roles in
the new democracy.
 Democratic institution
An institution is an enduring
structure that performs the most basic
functions of social organization and
communal existence. The polity and its
lead agency, government, are institutions
that address the primal need for order in
society and, subsequently, the effective,
authoritative prioritization of preferred
or valued outcomes for people in that
society
State capacity
-state capacity" means the ability of states
(countries) to prevent terrorist, for example by
having appropriate organizations and infrastructure
in place.
The role of state
-the core purpose of the state is protection.
This view would be shared by everybody, except
anarchists, who believe that the protective role of
the state is unnecessary or, more precisely, that
people can rely on purely voluntary arrangements
Most people accept that protection against
predators, both external and internal, is a natural
monopoly: the presence of more than one such
organization within a given territory is a recipe for
unbridled lawlessness, civil war, or both.
 Societal Organization in
the New Democracies
The other collective participant of a
politics of interaction is composed of
those factors identified with civil society.
In this study, the relevant collective actor
identified is the societal organization.
It is also clearly, the system still flux
as both positive and negative
features of the societal organization
have at times cancelled each other
out.
Its discussed in this section under
two headings: positive legacies from
authoritarian rule and reformism and
a strategic repertoire.
 Continuities: Positive Legacies
from the Authoritarian Period
In these concluding remarks on
authoritarian legacies and related politics in
Southern Europe the definitions and
dimensions of authoritarian legacies and
politics of the past conclusions are recalled;
the legacies and politics of the past are related
to democratic quality and the influence of the
former on the latter is assessed;
the contextual dimensions influencing
and conditioning the authoritarian
legacies and the politics of the past in
each country are also analyzed; attitudes
towards the past are reconsidered; and,
finally, how the problem of the fading of
legacies largely remains open is noted by
elucidating some ironic aspects of the
phenomena.
 Continuities :Positive
Legacies from the
Authoritarian Period
She points out that these new
forms of collective action coincided
with opposition to authoritarian
regimes. Jelins, 1998 also speaks
about new forms of interest
expression which emerged in many
recently restored democracies in
Latin America.
 Confirming Jelin's observations, in
the Philippines and in many other
new or newly restored democracies.
As mentioned above, Philippines and
brazil are one of the characterized by
weak patronage driven party system.
 It have been continued to be effective
alternative channels for the expression of
collective demands in restored
democracies which is according to the
societal organization.
Philippines cases shown how central the
theme of participatory citizenship is for
consolidation of democracy Democratic
Reformist Orientation and an Expanding
Strategic Repertoire.
It is a critical societal feature that has
enabled engagement was a
reorientation toward reformism.
Sacrifice of more drastic are also
involve specially the speedy social
solutions and for more extremist.
Along with this reaffirmation of such
basic democratic strategies which
where likewise reformist.
 This is akin to what Adler and
Webster "1995, 80" call "radical
reform", a strategic use of power "
that combines a radical vision with
strategy of reform "that kept in mind
longer term goals piecemeal reform
victories are pursued through legal
struggles.
Confirming some of Adler and Webster's
hunches. "1995:99", this study has
parties, even while safeguarding
autonomy. Through these, the vibrancy
of civil society can be preserved. Yet
more significantly , it was clear to CPAR
that these sub-strategies were centered
on the reformist objective of passing a
more redistributive law.
The casw of CPAR was exemplary, but is
example still has to be emulated in other
policy areas. " On negotiations, the
electoral process, and working through
government institutions and agencies" it
is the societal demand makers more
greatly rely. This openness, Hipster
"1998:171" points out, deepens the
demoralizations process and strengthens
a democracy by incorporating, instead of
marginalizing, autonomous societal
pressures.
What the Philippines cases further
suggest is that such institutionalization
can still combine conventional forms of
collective action with activities that
might even be disruptive and
threatening.
Katzenstein"1998, 195ff"points out that
the distinction between institutional and
protest politics is overdrawn.
Katzenstein emphasizes that such sharp
democration sidestep the need to
demonstrate and explain their linkage. It
tends to ignore the oft-stated reminder
of the difficulty of locating where state
begins and society ends. Finally, it also
generalizes to the point of brushing aside
more subtle variations in the experiences
of different social movements.
 Another Look at Democratic
Consolidation

In the extensive and still growing

collection of works on democratic
transition and consolidation, many
subtopics have been analyzed.
These include popular legitimization,
the institutionalization of electoral
and political party systems, civilian
supremacy over the military, state
decentralization, judicial reform the
regularization of political processes
in the different levels of government,
the instilling of democratic values,
social democratic reform, the
reinstatement of the rule of law, the
protection of economic and political
freedoms and rights, the
rationalization of the bureaucracy,
and others.