The term “ideology” was conceived in 1796 by the French philosopher Destutt de Tracy to refer to a new

science that endeavored to uncover origins of conscious though and ideas. He called this “science of ideas”
ideologie. It was his hope that ideology would eventually become an established science like zoology and
biology (Heywood, 2003).

Today, ideology could often mean different things to different people. Sociologist Peter Barham
(2013) stresses this point by saying that aside from its neutral definition of being a set of more or less
consistent beliefs, ideology is also “widely used… to describe a cluster of beliefs not only judged false or
distorted, but also deliberately concealing some hidden interest.”

Simply put, ideology is a set of related ideas or systematic group of concepts and beliefs about
culture, society, and human life. Often, ideologies dictate how societies should be structured. One example
is the Marxist ideology, which advocated a classless society.

To some people, however, ideology connotes ideas that spread false consciousness to the
exploited and oppressed. Ideology can also mean “an officially sanctioned set of ideas used to legitimize a
political system or regime” and “an all-embracing political doctrine that claims a monopoly of truth.”

Appropriately, an ideology that pertains to the conduct of the government is called a political
ideology. Political ideology is a more or less coherent set of ideas that provides a basis for organized
political action, whether the ideas are intended to preserve, modify, or overthrow the existing power
structure (Heywood, 2003).

Political ideologies are not impervious to change. They are evolving sets of ideas that are combined
in a variety of ways to guide, inspire, or goad people to political action.

Characteristics and relevance of political ideologies

The following are the characteristics of a political ideology (Heywood, 2003):

(1) It offers an account of the existing order, often in the form of a worldview;
(2) It provides a model of a desired future, a vision of a good society; and
(3) It outlines how political change can and should be brought about.

From the above mentioned characteristics, it could be seen that political ideologies are both
descriptive and perspective. They allow for positive and normative analysis if socio-political conditions.
Such conditions are analyzed vis-à-vis beliefs and justifications for the ideology which lays down
instructions or strategies for achieving the desired political objectives.

Ideologies differ greatly as to the extent to which they satisfy the above-listed characteristics.
Specifically, they differ in how complex, consistent, and flexible they are. Some ideologies are quite simple
while others are somewhat complex. In some ideologies, there may be or may arise ideas that conflict with
one another. These may be rectified as time goes by, or intensify and lead to different schools of thought
within the ideology. Finally, some ideologies are marked by having absolute answers to some questions,
while others are more flexible.

Liberalism

Liberalism emerged as a result of the breakdown of feudalism and the development, in its stead,
of a capitalist society.

It is a political ideology that gives importance to the fulfillment of the individual through the
satisfaction of his interests. This contemplates the establishment of society in which such aspirations could
be realized.
 Liberals believe that human beings are primarily creatures equipped with reason. Individuals are
born equal and should have equal opportunities to realize their goals. Each individual should, therefore, be
allowed the greatest latitude of freedom. Naturally, liberals support the principle of meritocracy, where
individuals are recognized and rewarded according to their talent and performance.

Out of liberalism grow the system of liberal democracy. Consistent with the freedoms accorded to
individuals, liberal democracy is built around the twin values of consent and constitutionalism. Consent
implies freedom of choice. Constitutionalism, on the other hand, means adherence, and not merely lip
service, to rule of law. There is observance of the checks and balance principle, and respect for human
rights. The primary consent and constitutionalism guarantees a society marked by diversity and pluralism.
Because of society’s adherence to democracy, the political regime gives importance to free competitive
elections and universal adult suffrage. The regime of democracy respects freedom of speech and of the
press, freedom of political association, and individual political liberties and civil rights as well (Magno 1988,
citing Cardoso as quoted in Roberts 1985).

Elements of Liberalism

(1) Individualism
Individualism is the central principle of liberalism. The human individual is given the most
importance; emphasis is placed not on social groups or collective bodies. Individuals in this context are
considered as having the same worth and possessing their own unique identities.

(2) Freedom
Freedom is the principal attribute of liberal ideology. Faith is replaced in the individual, who can act
according to his desires. Nevertheless, because the exercise of one’s freedom may clash with the exercise
of another’s personal rights, individual liberty is not without limitations. Freedom is therefore not absolute
and must be exercised with due regard to the rights of others. Thus, what liberals advocate is equal liberty
for everyone, subject to the occasional “inconvenience,” i.e., the unavoidable restrictions imposed by law.

The Civil Code of the Philippines contains provisions that clearly illustrate the above principle.
Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Code provide:

Article 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act
with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.
Article 20. Every person who, in contrary to law, willfully or negligently causes damage to another,
shall indemnify the latter for the same.
Article 21. Any person who willfully causes loss or damage to another in a manner that is contrary
to morals, good customs, or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.

(3) Reason
Liberals think that individuals have the capacity to correctly decide matters concerning their
interests. Underlying this thought is the notion that critical analysis and reason can unravel the rational
structure of the world. Since debate and argument can be utilized to settle differences and
misunderstandings, violence and bloody strife can be avoided. This could prove vital in the attainment of
progress.

The liberal influence is shown in Section 2, Article II of the 1987 Constitution, which states:
Section 2. The Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the law the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.

(4) Equality
 Liberals are committed to political equality (one person, one vote; one value) and to legal equality
(equality before the law). Their commitment proceeds from the belief that at least in moral worth, all humans
are born on equal footing. Even then, liberals recognize that there can be no equality as to the talents
individuals possess, or to these individuals’ willingness to work. Those brimming with talent may blossom
into intellectuals. Those with average mental skills may become successful in their chosen fields.
Meanwhile, those who are averse to using their mental faculties may end up being barely able to scrape
by. While many are workaholics and work tirelessly, some disdain labor and content to laze around. These
facts have convinced liberals that social equality or an equality of outcome is not attainable. Therefore,
liberals instead advocate equal opportunities so that individuals can harness their full potentials.

(5) Toleration
To liberals, toleration assures individual liberty and social enrichment. They believe that toleration
is both a guarantee of individual liberty and a means of social enrichment. Moral, cultural, and political
diversity as a measure of pluralism is desirable. Opposing views and interests balance each other; there is
harmony between them. Consequently, liberals view irreconcilable conflict as being unlikely.

(6) Consent
Consent or agreement forms the basis of social relationships and authority in the minds of liberals.
There is a social contract at work here. The consent of the governed is essential to the existence of
governments. Because of this, liberals see the necessity for representation and democracy.

(7) Constitutionalism
The limited government that liberals advocate results from the diffusion of government power
through the check and balance mechanism among the various institutions of government. This mechanism
prevents government abuses. The guarantee of respect for human rights can be assured through a Bill of
Rights contained in the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects the individual from official excesses.

Constitutionalism therefore requires government respect for individual rights, such as the right,
such as the right to equal protection of the laws, the right to suffrage, the right to from associations, the
right to free exercise of religion, the right to freedom of expression and peaceable assemble, the right
against self-incrimination, the right to travel, and the liberty of abode.

Types of liberalism

(1) Classical Liberalism

Classical liberalism is committed to an extreme form of individualism which underscores the self-
interest and self-sufficiency of human beings. Under this school of thought, individuals should fend for
themselves and take care of their own affairs. Government interference is seen as unhealthy and
destructive to the economy, which should be propelled by a self-regulating market.

(2) Modern Liberalism

Modern liberalism holds that capitalism which is not subject to regulation will merely give rise to
injustices, this makes the intrusion of the state absolutely necessary. If there is state intervention, individuals
will be protected from the social evils that threaten their existence. Their liberty, which promotes personal
development and self-actualization, will be given a boost.

Conservatism

Conservative ideas first emerged in the late 18 th century and early 19th century. They arose as a
reaction to the frenetic pace of economic and political change during the French Revolution. In this sense,
conservatism harked back to the ancient regime. It stood in defense of an increasingly embattled traditional
social order.
 Conservatism is defined by the desire to preserve institutions and is reflected in a resistance to, or
at least suspicion of, change. For the conservatives, tradition reflects the accumulated wisdom of the past,
as manifested in the practices that have endured the test of time.

In the estimation of conservatives, a society should be considered in its entirety. Such a view
recognizes that natural necessity gave rise to institutions and values. To illustrate, the basis of social
cohesion is authority. This provides people with a sense of who they are and what is expected from them.
Without any authority, however, society will break down. Hence, instead of basing political action on
abstract principles, such as freedom, equality, and justice, conservatives believe that reliance must be
placed on experience and history.

Elements of Conservatism

Heywood (2003) also identified seven elements of conservatism. These are tradition, pragmatism,
human imperfection, organicism, hierarchy, authority, and property.

(1) Tradition
Defense of tradition is an important theme upheld by conservatives. To them, tradition – time-tested
values, practices, and institutions – “reflects the accumulated wisdom of the past.” Conservatives believe
that tradition should be preserved for future generations instead of being replaced by new ones that could
bring about uncertainty. They regard tradition not only as a product of the accumulated wisdom of the past
but also as a source of reassurance and of collective sense of belonging.

(2) Pragmatism
Conservatives frown on abstract principles and systems of thought because of the perceived limits
of human rationality. They place their faith on experience, history, and the belief that practical circumstances
and practical goals should control human action.

(3) Human Imperfection

Human beings are weighed down by imperfections, according to the conservative viewpoint.
Individuals are dependent and seek security in the familiar and the known. They are also morally corrupt.
Because of these human imperfections, what is required is a strong state which will maintain order, enforce
strict laws, and impose harsh penalties on law breakers.

Without an effective state, humans will be left to themselves, thus destroying the fragile fabric of
society.

(4) Organicism
Conservatives theorize that society is an organic whole which exists as something that is more than
the sum of the its parts. It was not conceived through human ingenuity but arose out of necessity. What
strengthens the community and makes social cohesion possible is shared values, aside from a common
culture.

(5) Hierarchy
An organic society is characterized by a hierarchy of positions: individuals occupy different
positions in society because they perform different roles and responsibilities. Such inequality is only natural
and inevitable in view of the different capacities then individual possess. The inequality in position and
privilege does not cause misunderstanding and strife because society is held together by shared obligations
and reciprocal duties.

(6) Authority
 Authority produces social cohesion. It gives Individuals a clear sense of who they are and what is
expected of them. Although there is freedom it must go hand in hand with responsibility which individuals
organize.

What ensures that the freedom of one man does not clash with the freedom of another is authority,
which enforces order and ensures that freedom is exercised responsibly. Therefore, authority – especially
when exercised within limits – is a must.

(7) Property
Property is important to conservatives because it provides security to people. It also gives
individuals some amount of independence from the government, and encourages then to be law-obedient
and respectful for the property of others.

Socialism

Socialism was an offshoot of the grievances against industrial capitalism. The ideology initially gave
voice to resistance to the proliferation of factories which sidelined the artisans and craftsmen. Soon,
however, it advocated the concerns and expressed the fears of a growing industrial working class.

Socialism is an ideology that stands in opposition to capitalism and proposes an alternative which
is more humane and equitable. In capitalism, an individual rises according to ability. There is competition.
Unfortunately, this produces divisions in society: some become rich, while most struggle to survive and
remain poor. The goal of socialism is to minimize or abolish these class divisions. Because socialists view
human beings as social creatures who are bound by a common humanity, cooperation is preferred to
competition, and collectivism is favored over individualism. Equality therefore characterizes socialism.

If these is social equality, as the socialists believe, there will be social stability and cohesion.
Freedom is assured because material needs are satisfied.

Elements of Socialism

(1) Community
Socialism sees human beings as social creatures linked by a common humanity. Human behavior
is explained according to social factors instead of innate qualities. The emphasis is placed in what can be
nurtured.

(2) Fraternity
Human beings are connected by comradeship because they share a common humanity.
Cooperation is preferable to competition; individualism is shunned in favor of collectivism. Socialists think
that cooperation is necessary so that people can fully utilize their collective energies for the common good.
This strengthens community ties. Competition is not desirable because it is the cause of rivalries and conflict
among individuals who have to defeat others to the top.

(3) Social Equality

The paramount virtue of socialism is equality. To socialists, social equality, which is equality of
outcome as opposed to equality of opportunity, is important. It guarantees stability and cohesion in society
and encourages empathy among human beings. The exercise of the legal and political rights is also assured
when there is social equality.

(4) Need
Socialists believe that the basis of the distribution of material benefits should be need, rather than
merit or work. This formula is central to Karl Marx’s communist principle of distribution, which is “from each
according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Under this system, the state distributes goods to
people based on their need, and not on what they want. In the theory at least, this would achieve equality
for everyone, in that not one would have more than what is needed.

(5) Social Class

Socialism is often associated with a form of class politics. The socialist goal is to eradicate
economic and social inequalities. Nevertheless, because the elimination of inequalities is not realistic and
more of a pipe dream, socialists are content with chipping away at the economic and social inequalities in
society.

(6) Common Ownership

Some socialists see common ownership as the end of socialism itself, while others see it simply as
a means of generating broader equality. Common ownership to socialists enables material resources to be
harnessed for the common good. In contrast, private property allows selfishness, acquisitiveness, and
social division to thrive.

Types of Socialism

(1) Ethical Socialism

Ethical socialism promotes an essentially moral critique of capitalism. In short, socialism is
portrayed as morally superior to capitalism because human beings are ethical creatures, bound by love,
sympathy, and compassion.

(2) Scientific Socialism

There is an analysis of historical and social development in scientific socialism. As a form of
Marxism, it lays the groundwork for the replacement of capitalism by socialism.

(3) Revolutionary Socialism

Revolutionary socialism takes over the position that capitalism occupies in the existing state
structures. Since the ruling class controls the institutions, socialism can only triumph if the existing political
and social system is overwhelmed by revolution.

(4) Reformist Socialism

Reformist socialism takes the middle road by adopting consent, constitutionalism, and party
competition which are basic liberal democratic principles. It accepts the popular will as expressed though
the ballot box. This means that the state recognizes that al government authority emanates from the people.
The rule of law is followed and there is accountability to check government abuse. Elections provide the
venue for politicians to vie for control of government. Votes therefore control the makeup of the political
structure of the state.

(5) Fundamentalist Socialism

The primary goal of fundamentalist socialism is the replacement of the capitalist system with
socialism. This proceeds from the belief that capitalism is inferior to socialism. Consequently, there can be
no compromises: no capitalist ideal can be retained and the abolition of capitalism is non-negotiable.

(6) Revisionist Socialism

“Revisionist” is often an unflattering term which indicates support of ideas and beliefs that differ
from what is accepted, in a way that is seen as wrong or dishonest. It is used by pure Marxists who look
down on people who try to water down the ideas of Marx.
 Revisionist socialism does not advocate force to achieve a socialist society but gradual reforms
within the capitalist system. Reforms, ad not the eradication of capitalism is the goal of revisionist socialism.
There is a conscious effort to reach compromise between market efficiency and socialist ideals.

Communism

Communism may be described as a socio-economic structure which aims to establish a society

that is classless, egalitarian, and stateless.

It is also defined as a political ideology based on common ownership. Equality and fairness is the
principal concern of communism. In reality, a group of people exercises power and decides the course of
action in a communist country. This group, which is called the ruling elite, decides the activities are to be
undertaken by the public. In exercising its power, the ruling elite invariably interferes with human activity.
Such interference is so pervasive that people cannot criticize the ruling elite without risking prosecution and
imprisonment for treason and other high crimes.

Communism as a political principle

Communism advocates the organization of communes and common ownership of wealth, i.e., the
means of production belong to the community or the government. There is no privately owned property.
The abolition of private property is the cornerstone of the communist ideology, as expressed by Karl Marx
in his Communist Manifesto.

Communism as a social model

Communism has two versions: the model envisioned by Karl Marx (1818-83) and Friedrich Engels
(1820-1895) and the other, the one being produced by communist parties. The ideal model of Karl Marx
and Engels see as a future society where before full communism is attained, there would be a transitory
‘socialist’ stage of development characterized by the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat (the
workers or working class). Marx and Engels predicted that this would occur after capitalism is overthrown.

A communist society under the blueprint of Marx and Engels would have the following features:
 It would be a classless society because there would be a common ownership of wealth
 After the class system is abolished, the state would gradually disappear and the society would be
‘stateless.’
 The society would be geared towards production for the use and the satisfaction of human needs
instead of the market.
 Since technology would be liberated from the constraints of class-based production, the forces of
production would further develop.
 Human potential would fully develop as creative energies are released by unalienated labor.

The second version of communism as a social model drawn from experience is based on what was
established when the communist parties rose to power in the 20 th century. This was the form of communism
in the old USSR, China, Cuba, Vietnam, and North Korea. It is now described as ‘actually existing socialism’
or ‘orthodox communism.’ Orthodox communism is a hybrid of state socialism: a monopolistic and
hierarchical communist party has political control and calls the shots. Under this system, state collectivism
and central planning are on the way out. While North Korea and Cuba are slow in introducing reforms,
Russia, China, and Vietnam have adopted features of market capitalism, while retaining the monopolistic
and hierarchical communist party system. As a result, these three countries have made gigantic strides in
their economies.

Communism as an ideological movement

 Communist theory holds that economics prevails over other historical factors shaping the society.
communists prefer revolution to reform. They identify the proletariat as the revolutionary class, and
represent that the communist party is at the forefront of the struggle of the working class. Thus, they voice
support for socialist or proletarian internationalism. Because of their belief that the tools of production should
be commonly owned, they promote comprehensive collectivization, where economic production is the
responsibility of collectives or communes. Nowadays, perhaps only Cuba and North Korea adhere to
collectivization, as shown by their state farms and factories. While some form of private ownership is
allowed among Cubans, their government has not taken the path of Russia and China.

Relationship between political ideology and political community

The political ideology of a state inevitably shapes the configuration of the political community. This
occurs because the form of government reflects the ideals advocated by the political ideology. In other
words, a state would certainly not have institutions which not adhere to its beliefs. It would be incongruous
for a democratic nation advocating liberal ideas to have an authoritarian government or a dictatorship.
Conversely, it would be preposterous for a communist nation to have a multi-party system where there are
free elections and the officials of the government are elected by popular vote.

It does not mean, however, that a political ideology is necessarily immutable. It has to adapt to the
necessities of the times. An ideology should be malleable to survive and prevail. After all, it is just a set of
coherent ideas that serve as a blueprint for political action. For example, China has astutely retained its
one-party system while at the same time adopting some features of capitalism. This bold step has
transformed the country into an economic powerhouse: it is now one of the leaders on the world stage.

Impact of values on the political community

It is interesting to study how the political community in the Philippines manages itself. The structure
is simple. On the one hand, we have the political leaders who run the government. Under these elective
officials are the civil servants: the appointive officials and employees who make the huge government
machinery work. On the other hand, we have the constituents of these elective officials, the voters, their
families, and the non-voters. Since all ideas are shaped by societal values, the interaction among these
groups is influenced by such Filipino traits as pakikisama and utang na loob. These values sometimes
impact negatively on the operations of government. It would be better if we have more delicadeza, integrity,
and devotion to public service, rather than the often abused pakikisama and untang na loob. If the
Philippines is run like hell by politicians whom we vote into public office, it is to some extend because of
some of these values which we still hold dear.

It is true that election is a way to remove inefficient and corrupt elective officials in the government.
Filipinos, however, have not yet looked beyond their personal interests and employed suffrage as a political
tool to choose the best leaders for the country.

How political ideology affects the life of the everyday Filipinos

The ideologies espoused by the succession of Philippine presidents have had varying effects on
the social and political lives of Filipinos. After the country regained its independence in 1945, however, the
dame rigid structures resurfaced: the elite reasserted their dominance of the economy and politics.

The early years after the Second World War saw a largely destroyed local economy dependent on
American aid and Japanese reparations. Philippine presidents then were rabidly pro-American, and so were
many Filipinos. We lapped up everything “stateside,” and we were the “Americans’ little brown brothers.”
The political ideology hewed close to the American model. We maintained the presidential form of
government and two parties; the Nacionalista and Liberal parties slugged it out at the husting for seats at
the two-chamber Congress. Under the re-emergent democratic system, the patrimonial character of the
government remained. Many things depended on personal considerations and connections, even with the
growth of bureaucracy.

The election of Ferdinand Marcos as the President (1965-1985) was a turning point in the country’s
history. Taking advantage of the turmoil in the 1970’s (a great part of which was attributed to machinations),
Marcos launched a new ideology that advocated a “revolution from the center,” meaning the radical change
would come from the top of the political leadership. This was a departure from the standard notion that a
revolution is launched by the masses. He crafted the “New Society” (“Bagong Lipunan” in the vernacular)
as a showcase for his ideas, and he experimented with a mixed presidential and parliamentary system.
there was a president (Marcos) elected by popular vote, and there was a prime minister elected by the
parliament. The parliament, called the Batasang Pambansa, replaced Congress. The new legislature was
in more ways than one rubber-stamp parliament, although it grudgingly allowed for a small opposition bloc
to exist. Marcos was responsible for creating the “barangays” as a political unit to reach out to the masses.

As an authoritarian leader, Marcos himself was the lawmaker. He issues presidential decrees,
many of which were unpublished. He tied to effect social change through land reform by issuing Presidential
Decree no. 27. His wife, Imelda, did her part, establishing such institutions like the Heart Center, the Lung
Center, and the Kidney Center. She was active on the cultural front, building edifices such as the Cultural
Center and the Film Center. It was also during this time that the Philippines concentrated on the export of
Filipino labor as a tool to eradicate poverty and unemployment, thanks to Blas F. Ople, the county’s minister
at the time. Nevertheless, the unequal social structures remained. Poverty remained a problem.

Corazon Aquino, who replaced Marcos as he was deposed, returned the country to the path of
liberal democracy. She acted as the legislator when the Freedom Constitution was in effect. It was the time
when the political institutions of the country was being rebuilt. Soon, the 1987 Constitution replaced the
Freedom Constitution. The new chapter was a reaction to the excesses of the Marcos regime, explaining
why it is a very long document, unlike typical constitutions.

The redemocratization brought about many problems, or exposed those simmering below the
surface. On the political level, there is a highly politicized military, the persistence of elite-dominated,
patronage-based political party system, and rival claims for autonomy in the South (see Magno, 1988). On
the economic level, poverty and unemployment persist. There is the foreign debt burden and inflation to
contend with. On the social level, unequal social structures remain. Filipinos also lack a cultural identity.
(Id.).