OPINION | Why Strongmen Stay Strong

The Filipino electorate has been flirting with danger for decades — and danger keeps flirting back.

Like the ‘bad boys’ of a romance novel, political strongmen continuously flirt with their countrymen, making them fall for them despite the looming threat of a chaotic regime. And the Filipinos, ever susceptible to hollow promises and political dramas, keep reaching out — only to be burned again and again.

But unlike fiction, the heartbreak affects the entire nation. The country’s future falters slightly every time the allure of the strongman proves irresistible, leaving stability and progress hanging in the balance.

How many times must we relive this cycle before we finally learn to walk away?

Contemporarily exemplified by Trump and Putin (who was dubbed “the archetype and model for the current strongman leaders”), a strongman is a type of authoritarian political leader characterized by military dictatorships. According to the European Center for Populism Studies, political strongmen are more likely to engage in human rights violations and civil wars than civilian dictatorships.

This pattern is part of a global template, for instance, Adolf Hitler — one of the most prominent political strongmen in history — played a key role in the unfolding of the holocaust, leading to the mass murder and genocide of the Jews. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, who recently passed a legislation allowing him to run for two more consecutive terms, is still at war with Ukraine. The Philippines’ very own strongmen — Marcos and Duterte — did not stray away from this pattern: Marcos Sr. is best remembered for declaring Martial Law during his term, while Rodrigo Duterte is currently being held accountable at the International Criminal Court for crimes against human rights violations.

So why, despite the repeated warnings from history, do Filipinos — and citizens around the world — still fall for strongmen?

Part of the answer lies in the allure of personality-centered politics: a belief that one charismatic leader can fix all dilemmas of the country, acting as a liberal democratic reformer during their campaign and towards the early years of their regime. Duterte used the same tactic — presenting himself as the voice of the Filipino people, the knight in shining armour who might as well be Philippines’ last hope for national salvation.

With a personality that reflects the everyday Filipino — Duterte earned the loyalty of countless supporters. This loyalty then turned to downright obsession as they gradually turned blind to his problematic policies and even feeding into his authoritarian fantasies. A good example was when Duterte threatened to declare a revolutionary government — to which his supporters immediately received without question, openly calling for the suspension of the country’s democratic constitution.

However, the story does not end there. While Duterte’s charisma seduced voters in the present, historical memory — or the lack thereof — made it easier for authoritarian fantasies to take hold, setting the stage for a deeper nostalgia for strongmen.

The Filipinos, especially those from older age groups, desire a certain political “greatness” of the past. United States of America President Donald Trump built his entire campaign and political presence around this concept with his slogan ‘Make America Great Again’. A local copy of this slogan was manifested during Marcos Jr’s campaign for the presidency back in the year 2022. His slogan “Together we shall rise again” was simplified into a message of unity, rekindling a former greatness.

Moreover, Marcos Jr. centered his campaign on looking back at the seemingly ‘Golden Era’ during his father’s regime. He presented it as a time when the economy was thriving, when infrastructure was developed, and when there was peace and order. This nostalgic farming, however, isn’t just organic. It is amplified and shaped by deliberate campaigns such as media manipulation and blatant historical revisionism. Social media accounts spreading fake news, textbooks that obscure the ‘dark’ side of history, and even mainstream outlets have downplayed the human rights abuses during the Martial Law.

The countless human rights violations were conveniently swept under the rug to fit the narrative of a son coming back to restore the perceived glory. Ultimately, nationalism nostalgia — amplified by media manipulation and selective historical memory — sets the stage, but the real magnetism of strongmen lies in the psychological appeal of decisive, forceful leadership.

Beyond charisma and nostalgia, Filipinos’ attraction to strongmen is rooted in psychology. According to a study conducted by Agata Mirowska, seeking for a strongman or a tyrannical leader is influenced quite heavily by our past experiences, cultural upbringing, and general life exposure. Many Filipinos, for instance, unconsciously look for traits reminiscent of authority figures from their own lives — father, coaches, or mentors. This partly explains why Duterte’s paternal image, famously earning him the nickname ‘Tatay Digong’, resonated with millions of supporters who saw in him a protective figure capable of leading the nation.

In sum, the Filipino attraction — sometimes bordering on obsession — cannot be explained by personality or nostalgia alone. Psychological tendencies shaped by our upbringing and life experiences are also factors as to why authoritative figures (or strongmen) are deeply appealing. Understanding the interplay of multiple factors is crucial if a nation wishes to move beyond repeated cycles of the strongmen allure.

The lesson is clear: we, as watchdogs of democracy, must focus on results and not on personality. Instead of focusing on what they are, we should focus instead on what they can achieve and what they can deliver through their leadership, given their specific set of qualities. Filipinos’ fascination with strongmen is understandable, but democracy demands more than fascination: it demands discernment, accountability, and action beyond personality. Breaking the cycle requires institutions strong enough to resist personalities — and citizens resolute enough to choose leaders, not saviors.

The fantasy of the strongman is seductive — but fantasies cannot govern a nation. The Philippines deserves leaders who build institutions, not illusions.