01886nam a2200193   4500999001900000008004100019100002700060245011400087260000900201300001500210520115300225650004901378650002301427700002201450773007101472906002801543942001201571952010901583  c510171d510171190802b           ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d  aArugay, Aries A.97640  aPolarization without poles: Machiavellian conflicts and the Philippines' lost decade of democracy, 2000-2010.  c2019  ap.122-136.  aThe Philippines’ long democratic experience has been remarkably free of deeply politicized cleavages. Roman Catholicism as a hegemonic religion prevents religious polarization, ethnic identity fragmentation limits ethnic polarization, and weak parties forestall ideological or class polarization. Nevertheless, the country suffered a crisis of polarization during the short-lived Estrada presidency (1998–2001) and that of his successor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (2001–2010). The severe conflict was a product of power maneuvers by anti-Estrada forces, followed by anti-Arroyo actors returning the favor, given her gross abuses of power. Echoing Machiavelli’s famous distinction, the conflict pitted Estrada’s popoli (the many) against Arroyo’s oligarchic grandi (the few). This Machiavellian conflict ended with an oligarchic reassertion of Madisonian democratic rule through the electoral victory of Benigno Simeon Aquino III in 2010. We conclude the article by considering whether the populist challenge of current president Rodrigo Duterte (2016– ) might spark a similarly destabilizing conflict in the years to come. - Reproduced.  aPhilippines - Politics and Government 97641  aPolarisation97642  aSlater, Dan97643  aThe Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science  aDemocracy - Philippines  2ddccAR  00102ddc40709384111aIIPAbIIPAd2019-08-02h681(1), Jan, 2019: p.122-136.pAR120126r2019-08-02yAR