Like the Mafia and Ku Klux Klan

The obstacles to the passage of an anti-dynasty law have been so formidable and the level of frustration so widespread that many citizens and reformers have virtually given up.

Before pessimism about the passage of an anti-dynasty law is perverted into an endorsement of dynastic politics, I want to introduce into the debate my belief that the battle can be won if advocates can change their strategy.

I believe the fight can be won if the struggle for anti-dynasty legislation shifts strategies from fighting for votes in the Congress to pressing forward a fight against pernicious and harmful elements in society.

This can be achieved if we liken the fight against political dynasties to the US campaign and struggle against the Italian Mafia and the Ku Klux Klan.

The needed legislation can be won in Congress despite the many reactionary elements there if Filipino reformers take a leaf from the successful campaigns waged in America against the Mafia and the Klan that produced the effective and appropriate laws to battle these secret and sinister organizations in American society.

Just decades ago, few in the US would have believed that the Mafia and the white supremacist Klan could be decisively beaten and subdued, but today no American would wish to identify with the Mafia or the Klan, although neither has been completely wiped out.

Author Francis Fukuyama in his book on the subject of social capital, “Trust,” is a brilliant study of the interconnectedness of economic life with cultural life.

Fukuyama demonstrated in his book that while the Italian Mafia and the Ku Klux Klan possess plenty of social capital, they fundamentally undermine and obstruct the progress and betterment of society.

As social scientists have noted, “There is evidence that the extended family is an effective institution for survival but an obstacle to development.”

Political scientist Edward Banfield, studying southern Italy, introduced the concept of “amoral familism,” a culture that is deficient in communitarian values but fosters familial ties.

“In a society of amoral familists, no one will further the interest of the group or community except as it is to his private advantage to do so,” Banfield wrote. There is little loyalty to the larger community or acceptance of behavioral norms that require the support of others.

Hence, familism is amoral, gives rise to corruption and fosters deviance from norms of universalism and merit. So, anything goes that advances the interests of one’s self and family.

The Mafia is an extreme example of amoral familism. Banfield, in fact, argues that corruption in southern Italy and comparable traditional societies is an expression of forces similar to those that sustain the Mafia.

The World Values Survey 1990, together with aggregate statistics from the World Bank, provide data to create a scale of familism. The nations that score high on this scale tend to be among the most corrupt. Known for their strong familial ties, most Asian nations rank among the more corrupt.

On the other hand, Scandinavians are by far the lowest on the familism scale, these countries are considered the least corrupt. Regression analysis affirms the association. The familism scale and Corruption Perceptions Index relate strongly.

I do not have the space here now to discuss in detail the story of how the Mafia and the Klan were effectively subdued in America through the passage of timely and purposive legislation.

In the struggle, both the Mafia and the Klan were portrayed in the media in all their odium and criminal activities. Both names became synonymous with evil in the eyes of the ordinary American citizen.

Imagine for a moment how different the Filipino political families are, if their crimes, and criminal activities and practices were fully investigated and reported in the media.

The votes for an anti-dynasty law will be won in the Congress, as legislators rush to proclaim themselves as innocent and law-abiding political leaders.