Explaining Philippine Electoral Fraud Using General Strain Theory

Last May 12, 2025, Filipinos trooped to the polling precincts to vote for the next set of senators, congresspeople, governors, mayors, and councilors who will rule their respective areas of jurisdiction for the next three years. There have already been anecdotal reports of vote-buying, electoral violence and intimidation, and misinformation from all sides of the political spectrum. What should have been a peaceful exercise of democracy—where people freely elect their chosen representatives—has once again turned into violent mayhem, corruption of government coffers, and, worse, corruption of public morals.

But why is this the case? Why has electoral violence become a defining feature of Philippine democracy? Why do candidates resort to killing political opponents, destroying reputations, buying votes, and corrupting the electorate just so they can secure positions in office? What drives intelligent, promising, articulate individuals to become dubious, violent, and corrupt?

A theory that can help explain this phenomenon is General Strain Theory (GST), a widely recognized theory in the field of criminology. According to Robert Agnew, individuals commit crime as a coping mechanism in response to strains or stressors they encounter. Strains can take the form of the presence of an obnoxious or harmful stimulus, or the loss of something that is positively valued. Exposure to these strains, according to Agnew, leads to negative emotions such as anger, frustration, and jealousy. While most people find lawful or positive ways to cope with these emotions, some turn to crime—especially when criminal behavior is normalized or even rewarded in their community.

Using this perspective, we can better understand why electoral violence persists in the Philippines. Electoral positions in the Philippines are not just seats of governance; they are sources of power, prestige, and income. Holding political office secures not just personal gain but also the livelihood of one’s family, relatives, and loyal supporters. Being entrenched in a political position guarantees financial security for generations. Therefore, any threat to this position creates immense strain.

First, there is the threat of being unseated, which, in the language of GST, represents the potential loss of a positively valued stimulus. Additionally, politicians are exposed to obnoxious stimuli during elections—negative campaigning, attack ads, threats, and actual violence from rival camps. These pressures build up negative emotions such as hatred, frustration, and resentment toward political opponents. Over the course of the campaign, these negative emotions accumulate, pushing many candidates toward negative coping mechanisms.

This negative coping may take the form of counter-misinformation, outspending rivals to buy votes, or employing violence to intimidate the other side. The message they want to send is clear: they will not back down. To cower or show weakness risks losing face and ultimately losing the election.

GST also explains how these behaviors are rationalized. Candidates tell themselves—and their supporters—that they must use goons, guns, gold, and glitter because “the other party is using them too.” They claim they must buy votes, otherwise, “the other party will outspend and outbuy us.”

Tragically, this rationalization is not only tolerated but widely accepted by many Filipinos, who willingly participate in the buying and selling of votes. As a result, political actors who employ these negative coping behaviors are rewarded and even embraced by the electorate.

And once re-elected, these politicians once again enjoy the prestige, power, immunity, and impunity that come with holding office—a valued stimulus they will fiercely cling to.

But this comes at the expense of the Filipino people. All the money spent on securing votes and employing violence during the election cycle will be recouped through corruption once they are in office. Politicians will manipulate government contracts, take kickbacks from favored business partners, and exploit other forms of public resources to recover their investments—all while the cycle of corruption, violence, and moral decay continues.