Commentary: Why political families still dominate in Southeast Asia

DILEMMA DEMOCRACY

The development of congenital democracy, as critics refer to it, poses a fundamental challenge to democratic ideals. &nbsp,

Dynasties can job stability, but their dominance could lead to inequality and competition stifling. Younger, less educated leaders struggle to get money or media attention, perpetuating a sealed system. &nbsp,

At least two political dynasties were attempting to retake control of the May 2025 votes, according to the Philippines Center for Investigative Journalism. With such a majority, policymaking runs the risk of turning into a battle for powerful individuals rather than a website for addressing broader public concerns. &nbsp,

Southeast Asia is not a distinct country. Inheritance politicians flourishes in both emerging and established governments all over the world. &nbsp,

Names like the Kennedys, Bushes, and Story have shaped American politicians for decades, and Le Pens and Trudeaus in Canada and France both demonstrate how parental legacy echoes permeate Western governments. The Nehru-Gandhi kingdom has ruled Congress Party elections in India for generations. &nbsp,

The trend has received criticism for sustaining power imbalances internationally. Inheritance politics undermine the meritocracy because governing is less about ensuring royal control and more about maintaining social welfare. &nbsp,

As with the West, voters in Southeast Asia alternate between resentment toward wealthy dominance and departure. The crucial difference is in the institution’s resilience, where stronger institutions in established democracies frequently offset some, if not most, of royal rule’s negative effects.