Societal Threefolding and Good Governance: Part II

Nicanor Perlas
24 February 2009

As we have seen in Part I, Civil society is the key factor in any movement for good governance. Civil society is also the key factor in a new concept of balance of power that any proponent of the new politics should take to heart in creating a better government. For after all, the new politics is not just about winning elections. That is the easy part. It is also about being able to govern in order to ensure that government truly works for the people. And to effectively govern, one needs to understand the threefold nature of modern societies and the three kinds of power that reside in the three spheres of society.

The Different Realms of Politics, Culture, and Economics

Society is complex. It has three key dimensions that, while they have their own areas of responsibility, interact in various ways with each other.

Society is more than just politics even though we, as a people, have an almost incurable addiction to confusing political change with societal transformation. Societies also have an economy that provides for the physical and social needs of its citizens. Therefore, the economy, not just politics, has to be transformed to make it more prosperous, efficient, equitable and caring.

Society also has a cultural dimension. We are all embedded in a cultural reality that deeply affects what we think and how we feel. We cannot just change institutions. Because institutions are basically people in interaction with each other, we also need to change backward aspects of our mindsets and our behaviors to enable us to effectively run these new institutions and to birth innovative approaches to save a dying Philippines. For example, we cannot simply create new laws to combat corruption. We also have to change the mindset and the identity that generates corruption almost automatically against all institutional arrangements.

The battle for hearts and minds is the mother of all battles, and will deeply affect what happens in the economic and political arenas. This is also why a societal revolution, including the radical redesign of our politics to make it work for the people, requires an inner revolution in order to succeed in transforming Philippine society. Ask the U.S. troops in Iraq how it felt to win military battles and yet lose the war of hearts and minds. Cultural power is the major power in any society and it is organized citizens and cultural institutions that wield it for good or for bad. The political revolution of 2010 also requires a cultural revolution in society at large. This cultural revolution will then usher in a new age not only in politics but also in business as well.

Lasting change thus will come only when we mobilize concerned Filipinos in ALL realms of society – economic, political, and cultural (especially civil society organizations). We need to build strategic alliances with Filipinos in all realms of society to successfully undertake the kind of radical societal change we want for the Philippines.

Three Kinds of Power in Society

In order to harmonize the diverse perspectives and approaches of all those who genuinely want something different, good governance, using the societal threefolding approach, needs to understand the existence of different forms of power in society. Each of the three key actors in society brings a different kind of power to the table. Government, of course, harnesses political power. Business mobilizes economic power. And civil society wields cultural power.

In the old balance of power, the politician is only dealing with one kind of power, political. And politicians are generally adept in the use and abuse of political power. This is the reason why Arroyo had a relatively easy time destroying the traditional balance of power and using the executive, legislative, and judiciary to her advantage. It was much easier to corrupt them all and use them for her purposes.

In the societal threefolding approach to good governance, however, the situation is very different. Because these are different forms of power, a traditional politician or trapo will have a much more difficult time consolidating and controlling the three kinds of power. He may be adept in the use of political power. But he may be totally illiterate and in the dark when it comes to understanding and co-opting cultural power.

Arroyo had a semi-conscious understanding of the three kinds of power. And she used political power and money (economic power) to try to buy businesspeople, politicians, and civil society leaders. She succeeded overwhelmingly with trapos. But, while she did succeed in dividing the key institutions of society, she failed to consolidate control in the realms of business and civil society. Now, Arroyo faces the ire of the vast majority of business and civil society leaders this coming 2010 national elections.

The new balance of power therefore goes beyond the old concept of three branches of government. The new balance of power is about bringing together all the key power holders of society for the benefit of the whole, instead of just being mired in conflict with each other. (For a more detailed treatment of societal threefolding, see Nicanor Perlas, Shaping Globalization: Civil Society, Cultural Power, and Threefolding, available from TruthForce!)

The New Governance: Society-Centered not State-Focused

Our longing for a new politics should therefore be society-centered, and not just state-focused as has usually been the case. We can call this revolution, societal threefolding, because it aims for the peaceful radical transformation of all three spheres of society. This does not mean shying away from political advocacy and involvement. Rather it means broadening the arena of struggle to include not only the political arena, but also the economic and cultural ones as well.

Aside from helping the new breed of politicians govern, the societal threefolding approach to good governance has added advantages as compared with traditional approaches. Modern societies, including the Philippines face complex challenges. Even if there is no internal antagonism within government, these complex challenges cannot be solved with political solutions alone. Often a problem may be in the economic area. But political and cultural factors also play a part. We can say a similar thing about political problems. These are deeply intertwined with economic and cultural factors.

To solve complex problems of this nature, the new breed of politician who wants to advance good governance must ensure the involvement of civil society and business in the process. Government alone cannot bring in the cultural aspects of a social problem nor can it mobilize cultural resources. Similarly government alone cannot bring the economic perspective to bear on a social problem nor can it harness the resources that are in the domain of the economy. Similarly neither business alone nor civil society alone can achieve much if they do not bring in the political context of a social problem.

Good governance therefore means bringing all the resources of a society (political, cultural, and economic) as well as all the key actors of society (government, civil society, and business) to solve complex societal issues. In this way the new politician can really on a systemic perspective to understand and solve a systemic problem. In this way, he or she can mobilize all the necessary resources of a society to tackle the increasingly interconnected challenges that face the modern world.

The Governance Working Group of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences [IIAS], defines governance as follows.

“Governance refers to the process whereby [different] elements in society wield power and authority, and influence and enact policies and decisions concerning public life, and economic and social development.”

“Governance is a broader notion than government, whose principal elements include the constitution, legislature, executive and judiciary. Governance involves interaction between these formal institutions and those of civil society [and business]. ” (Emphases added.)

This definition explicitly states that governance is not just about government and the traditional balance of power found by differentiating government into the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It is about the involvement of civil society and business.

In the quote above, we should take the different elements in society to include not only civil society but also business. The governance definition of IIAS itself would be self-contradictory if it excluded business from the governance process. Then the “elements” would be incomplete without business and the perspective on “economic . . . development” would be incomplete without business.

Governance, therefore, is about bringing the “elements in society [which] wield power, authority and influence” to collectively arrive at decisions about the future of society. Successful governance means, therefore, bringing together the key actors in the three realms of society to work out the common good of the community.

In Part III, we will take a look at how this new approach is working at the global and local levels. Then we will realize that we are on the brink of harnessing powerful new ways to shape our collective national and planetary destiny.