THESIS DEFENSE (citations)

populism as a contested concept characterized by a people-versus-elite dynamic

populism’s conceptual overlaps with nationalism and nativism

shifting bases of support from left-leaning economic to right-leaning cultural variants

Rockman (2022)

populist governance often reveals an inherent tendency toward autocracy, producing democratic backsliding or even full autocratization

Muno & Pfeiffer, 2022

situating populism within systemic pressures such as globalization, technological change, and inequality

Ugorji (2018)

populism is best conceived as a political style rather than an ideology, distinguished by the rhetorical opposition of “the people” to “the elite.”

Moffitt (2020)

support for populism in established and long-standing democracies has risen to over three times its level in the 1990s and more than doubled in former Soviet states

attributed to the failure of mainstream political parties in providing solutions to pressing challenges, creating a climate of uncertainty which populists exploit

Grzymala-Busse et al. (2020)

in 31 countries:

57% believed their country was in decline

47% expressed a preference for a strong leader willing to disregard conventional approaches to governance

IPSOS populist report (2025)

A common trait among populists is the deliberate projection of ordinariness

tailoring their language to match layman’s vocabulary

creating the illusion of being ‘one of us,’ developing a sense of trust, relatability, and intimacy among the public

Lindholm et al., 2024

Right-wing populists are observed to rely heavier on strong and vulgar language, portraying emotional and intense narratives

Left-wing populists center on institutional reform and criticisms

Wang 2025

Duterte’s SONAs are marked by informal, confrontational rhetoric projected through both broadcast and social media, reinforcing his populist persona and anti-elite image

Panao and Pernia (2022)

consequences of populist governance extend beyond a leader’s tenure

concept of the “populist hangover,” in which the removal of a populist leader does not necessarily restore democratic norms

Matijasevich (2018)

RRL-2

Populism in the Philippines arises from the failures of liberal democracy

compounded by persistent economic inequality and cultural longings for specific leadership styles

Talamayan (2024)

Duterte’s brand of populism is right-wing and exclusionary, marked by anti-American rhetoric

Estrada’s hybrid populism blended left- and right-wing elements rooted in his cinematic persona

Corazon Aquino’s centrist, pro-people power style

Ramon Magsaysay’s pro-ordinary orientation

Ragragio, 2025

Duterte’s populism emerged from:

frustrations with the failed liberal democratic project

socioeconomic inequality

crime and illegal drugs

Colmenares (2025)

By presenting himself as an underdog champion

Duterte framed human rights and due process as obstacles to swift justice

resonating strongly with marginalized Filipinos who felt excluded from economic growth and disillusioned with elite-led governance

Colmenares (2025)

Western democracy: populism remains largely rhetorical

Less developed democracies (Philippines): populist leaders consolidate power through political violence

Duterte’s deadly anti-drug campaigns showed how violence functions as political tool and populist symbol

McCoy (2017)

RRL-3
SONA recurring themes:
economic development, enhancement of public services, responses to persistent national challenges

Positive sentiment:
frequent use of the term “development”

Miranda and Bringula (2021)

Estrada’s SONAs had populist themes:

notably poverty alleviation and internal security

declaration of an “all-out war” against communist insurgents

Miranda & Bringula, 2021

Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo SONAs as instruments of political legitimacy during periods of crisis

use of scapegoating, image restoration, and persuasive structures

to restore authority and reinforce her public persona

Jibrin, 2003

Benigno S. “PNoy” Aquino III

linguistic shift by delivering his SONAs entirely in Filipino

reinforced his Daang Matuwid reformist agenda

Autida-van der Zee

Estrada, Arroyo, and Aquino III represent distinct rhetorical and structural orientations prior to Duterte

Miranda and Bringula, 2021

Duterte’s communicative style minimizes the perceived distance between leader and citizen, creating a sense of intimacy and familiarity

Crystal (2003)

A defining feature of Duterte’s speeches was the frequent repetition of emphatic statements such as “I hate drugs”

which heightens both emotional and cognitive engagement

Tannen (2007)

Duterte’s use of English-Filipino code-switching, profanity, and humor embodies “linguistic intimacy,” forging common ground with audiences while unsettling traditional norms of presidential discourse

Tannen (2007)

Duterte’s unconventional approach brought fresh air to a political scene long defined by the predictable and uninspiring leadership of post-1986 elite-dominated liberal democratic regimes, capturing the imagination of a public eager for change

Araneta-Alana et al. (2025)

The blend of informality and aggression reinforced Duterte’s anti-elite persona and redefined the SONA as a populist performance

reshaping the expectations of presidential communication in the Philippines

Cruz and Bacarro (2021)

Mamunta (2022)