The Philippines is a nation of contrasts. It is a country rich in natural resources and human talent, yet burdened by poverty, corruption, and instability. Its people are resilient and joyful, yet often anxious about the future. In the midst of these contradictions, one theme surfaces again and again: the desire for control, especially through politics and social order.
Filipinos long for leaders who can bring discipline, stability, and progress. In times of crisis, whether caused by natural disasters, economic decline, or political unrest, the people cry out for authority figures who promise order. Leaders rise and fall, each claiming to hold the solution. Campaigns are filled with pledges to eradicate corruption, end poverty, and bring peace. For many, the vote is a way of grasping for control over an unpredictable life.
Yet time and again, the cycle repeats. Leaders who once inspired hope often disappoint. Promises of order turn into systems of control. Fear drives obedience, but corruption creeps in quietly. Citizens find themselves disillusioned, realizing that no leader can fully guarantee stability. This chapter explores the paradox of control in Philippine politics and society: the longing for strong authority, the cost of surrendering freedom to fear, and the discovery that real power lies not in government control but in collective trust and civic hope.
The Desire for Leaders Who Promise Order and Discipline
Filipinos live with uncertainty daily. The jeepney driver never knows if he will earn enough passengers to cover the boundary. The vendor in Divisoria cannot predict if heavy rain will wash away her earnings for the day. The family in Samar faces typhoons each year, unsure if their small hut will withstand the storm. Against this backdrop, it is natural for citizens to crave stability.
Politicians have long tapped into this longing. Campaign slogans emphasize order, discipline, and control. A leader who appears decisive and strong quickly attracts support. The reasoning is simple: if ordinary life is chaotic, then perhaps a powerful figure can impose order from above.
This explains why leaders who project strength and authority often win elections in the Philippines. Even if they are controversial, their firm image resonates with people tired of uncertainty. In fact, many Filipinos are willing to overlook flaws in exchange for the promise of discipline. The dream is that a single leader, through control, can fix what is broken in society.
Fear as the Engine of Control
Control in politics often feeds on fear. When crime rates rise, people fear for their safety. When corruption scandals erupt, people fear being cheated. When inflation soars, families fear hunger. Leaders respond by amplifying these fears, then presenting themselves as the solution.
The pattern is familiar. A candidate warns of chaos and disorder, then promises to restore peace through strict policies. Citizens, already exhausted by insecurity, embrace the promise. They surrender freedom in exchange for protection, believing that only a strong hand can shield them from danger.
The problem is that fear-driven control often comes at a cost. Freedoms are restricted, dissent is silenced, and citizens become hesitant to speak up. Fear breeds compliance, but it also breeds silence. In such silence, corruption grows unchecked.
History in the Philippines has shown this clearly. During Martial Law, fear was the primary tool of control. Many citizens accepted repression in exchange for the appearance of order. Streets seemed safer, but voices were stifled. For some, life improved, but for many others, human rights were violated and corruption thrived in secrecy. The promise of order turned into a prison of fear.
The Cycle of Control and Corruption
Philippine politics is marked by cycles. Each generation of voters is courted with promises of discipline and reform. Campaign jingles fill the air, posters line the streets, and candidates shake hands in barangays across the nation. Hope flares bright during election season.
But once in power, many leaders fall into the same pattern. Control is used not only for public order but also for personal gain. Government contracts are awarded to allies, positions are given to relatives, and public funds are siphoned off for private benefit. Corruption festers, often hidden under the language of efficiency and discipline.
Citizens, once hopeful, grow disillusioned. Protests arise. The leader is either voted out or forced out, and a new candidate arrives with fresh promises. The people, weary yet hopeful, give control once again to someone new. And the cycle continues.
This repetition reveals the paradox: the more citizens surrender control to leaders, the more they lose it. By trusting entirely in authority, people inadvertently create space for corruption. Control promises stability, but it often results in betrayal.
The Illusion That Government Alone Can Guarantee Stability
One of the deepest illusions in Philippine politics is the belief that government alone can bring stability. This belief is understandable. After all, government has power over laws, resources, and institutions. But the truth is that no leader, no administration, and no system can control every aspect of life.
Natural disasters regularly prove this. Typhoons, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions strike with little warning. Even the most prepared government cannot prevent destruction. Economic instability also reminds citizens of this truth. Inflation, global oil prices, and pandemics all influence the economy in ways beyond a leader’s control.
Yet citizens often place impossible expectations on leaders, believing that electing the right person will guarantee peace, prosperity, and security. When leaders fail, the disappointment is sharp. People accuse them of incompetence or betrayal, forgetting that stability was never fully within their power to provide.
The illusion of control through politics creates constant stress. Citizens pin their hopes entirely on authority figures, only to be disillusioned again and again.
Collective Trust and Civic Responsibility
If control through authority is fragile, then where does true stability come from? The answer lies in collective trust and civic responsibility.
Filipinos have a long history of people power. The world witnessed it during the EDSA Revolution, when ordinary citizens gathered to oust a dictator without violence. That moment proved that change does not only come from authority above but from collective courage below.
Even in everyday life, this principle is visible. In barangays, neighbors often rely on each other during disasters more than on government relief. Families share food, churches open their doors, and volunteers organize rescue missions. Stability is not imposed from above but cultivated through trust, solidarity, and responsibility.
Civic hope also plays a vital role. When citizens believe in their own ability to shape society, corruption weakens. Community organizations, cooperatives, and advocacy groups show that ordinary people can resist the illusion of control by building genuine power together.
This does not mean government is irrelevant. It remains essential for laws, infrastructure, and justice. But real peace and order emerge when citizens stop surrendering everything to leaders and begin exercising their own responsibility.
Reframing Control as Shared Responsibility
The paradox of control in Philippine politics invites a reframing. Instead of equating control with a strong leader who dominates, society can see control as shared responsibility. This means leaders provide structure and resources, while citizens provide vigilance, participation, and accountability.
Control is no longer about fear but about cooperation. Leaders are not saviors but servants. Citizens are not passive followers but active partners. In this model, corruption is harder to sustain, because collective trust creates transparency.
Imagine a government office where policies are created not just by top officials but with input from community representatives. Imagine elections where citizens vote not only based on promises but also on track records and accountability. Imagine schools teaching not blind obedience but critical thinking, so that future voters question rather than surrender.
This vision is not an illusion of control but a practice of trust. It acknowledges uncertainty while building strength together.
Conclusion: The Real Power of Hope
The Filipino longing for order is understandable. Life in the Philippines is filled with unpredictability, from natural disasters to political scandals. Leaders who promise control seem to offer comfort, but history has shown that this comfort is fleeting. Fear-driven authority breeds silence, and silence breeds corruption. The cycle repeats until people realize that control from above is never enough.
The real power lies in collective trust, responsibility, and hope. When Filipinos rely not only on leaders but also on one another, stability becomes more enduring. When fear is replaced with courage, and blind obedience with accountability, society can thrive even in uncertainty.
Control robs peace when it is imposed by fear. But peace grows when responsibility is shared by all. The paradox of control in politics is resolved not by surrendering freedom to authority but by surrendering fear to hope.
The Philippines has always been resilient. Its people laugh in the face of hardship, rebuild after every storm, and gather in solidarity during every crisis. This resilience is proof that the nation’s deepest strength does not come from control but from trust. In the end, the stability Filipinos seek is not a gift from above but a creation of the people themselves.
ns216.73.216.174da2
and then Add to home screen.