A peculiar leader - 2

DUTERTE is in the mold of a charismatic leader, the intervening months have revealed as much. And the sooner we arrive at this recognition, the easier it would be to place a handle on his maverick style.

Weber defined such a leader as someone whose traits and qualities as a person stand out that he or she is accorded the legitimacy and authority to govern over a constituency. It is a type of leadership that harkens back to the gemeinschaft communities of old, when societies were far simpler and less complex. Such type of authority is considered effective for small societies who have not yet reached the level of complexity and differentiation of modern social organizations since the persona of the charismatic figure is able to marshal the people toward simple community goals.

This type of authority, however, is insufficient to handle the complex demands of modern societies and Weber, prescribes instead a society administered by codified rules and written documents which he labels as rational-legal authority. Imagine the complicated processes of government or business that is not delegated and centralized in the decision-making power of a single individual. The former creates problems of succession and sustainability and is terribly inefficient while the latter builds institutions and practices.

These categorizations are, however, heuristic devices and have never really existed in pure form. They are, for the most part, ideal categorizations that show what may be the dominant dispositions of a given society. In the case of the Philippines, I doubt if we have ever gone beyond the gemeinschaft sensibilities of our precolonial and colonial past. We have always looked towards traditional authority in the form of chieftains and priests, every now and them, a charismatic figure promising to us the sun and moon.

That Filipinos have placed at the helm anew another charismatic leader reveals a lot about the small-town traits that still characterize Asia's first democracy. A cursorily look at the previous presidents also reveal, to varying degrees, this penchant for bringing to Malacañang new versions of a political messiah. No president has ever assumed office without presenting him or herself as god's answer to the poverty and hopelessness that abound in these parts.

However, it was the case that these were all sly deliberate attempts to rein in the votes of the masses. Once in power, it was still the converging interests of big business, elected politicians, and government that determined the outcomes of a corrupt and self-serving state whether it be the swashbuckling actor, the superstar look-alike lady, or the son of revered yellow icon.

But what makes Duterte seemingly of a different mode is that he seems relatively immune or enjoys relative autonomy from the influence of these interest groups. The presence of the same cabal of corrupt politicians remain and they will continue to create difficult conditions for genuine reforms to take place. Human rights and the drug war are just some of the issues that are now being used to undermine his administration. Pork barrel is still in place as well as the usual wheeling and dealing of private contractors for fat government deals.

All these may seem overwhelming and show more of the same. Whereas previous administrations were not just innocent spectators to these types of shenanigans but were actually active players who ensured that their camp cornered the largesse, the same cannot be said of Duterte so far.

For sure, not all of his people are saints. Many of them are of the same mold as the predatory politicians and power brokers of old. But it cannot be said that Duterte, himself, serves the same self-interested and corrupt masters. And his moral ascendancy, when it comes to issues related to corruption, and his popular drug war, allows him the full entitlements of a charismatic leadership. He can, at anytime, revoke an onerous government contract or treaty, shift foreign policy, and pursue the peace talks based on what he thinks is right.

I think the Philippine electorate was deliberate in their choice of a charismatic leader as opposed to other types of authority placed on the table for their choosing in the last elections. They did not want more of the same two-faced political tactic where the projected image is squeaky-clean but it is the same rotten politicking and plunder of public coffers underneath.

They took their chances with Duterte because he offers them a clean break with the past, a promise that things will never be the same again, for better or for worse. However, it still remains to be seen if one man can undo what is a systemic and historical problem.