It is eight months to go until the next Philippine elections and the political propaganda coming out in all media are about the personalities of the possible candidates. Very little is said of the principles, ideals, social agenda, or achievements of the political parties. The group that publicly espoused their moral and ethical values, 1Sambayan, is not even a political party but a civic coalition trying to unite a solid opposition. It is not helping that the current administration is attacking all critics of their governance with personal attacks about their fatness, hairstyles, and bikini underwear. This is not good for Philippine politics and the country. But this is also not good for the politicians.
Personality is important in politics, as charismatic, strong, and intellectually-competent leaders attract followers and will be good for governance. Philippine politics, however, drifted too much to personality dominance after Marcos declared martial law in the 1970s, and abolished the two-party system that was in place since the Philippines become a republic. Marcos established KBL, which was his own political party and allowed a multi-party system. The structure and organization of the Nacionalista and Liberal Parties were totally demolished by persecuting and jailing the party leaders and members, while those remaining were defeated or absorbed into the KBL. With multiple parties allowed, these old parties were just one of the smaller parties allowed to exist to give semblance of democracy. Even after the EDSA People Power revolution, political parties continued to be the personal political parties of the incumbent president and his allies, devoid of party principles and ideals. This situation suited the desires and styles of power-hungry populist politicians who need centralized and unchecked power and control of the government and the people. These were not pronounced and prominent in the time of Cory Aquino, Ramos, Estrada, and Noynoy Aquino as they were not power hungry and had better respect for the Constitution, but it was/is obvious in the time of Arroyo and Duterte.
For any country, especially a democratic country like the Philippines, personality politics erodes and diminishes social and political institutions. Independent branches of the government like the legislature, the courts, the Commission on elections, the Commission on Audit, and others are pressured and may lose its check and balance functions, when personally pressured by politicians. Politics becomes extremely transactional, with person-to-person negotiations between politicians, in complete disregard of the needs of the community and country. This leads to more graft and corruption as the spoils inure the person or family rather than the party or the country. If the people and civil society do not resist this and fight back, this is the slippery slope that will destroy democratic society.
Fortunately, personality-driven politics is also not good for politicians. There is no continuity and legacy in personality politics. While some family political dynasties may last more than one election cycle, they will eventually end without leaving a good and lasting legacy. Extended and succeeding family members are not always as competent and may abhor the system. The demise of the dominant personality diminishes the supporters and weakens the base substantially, as there are no supporting ideals and principles that bind them together, except the benefits and fear from/of the leader. The party then becomes a small party waiting for another personality to adopt them. Look at all the political parties that came after the KBL, like PDP, Laban, NUP, etc.; they are all forgettable names. Contrast them with the business conglomerates that have survived 50 years or more, like the Ayala Group, the Aboitiz Group, the Lopez Group, the SM Group, and others. They are anchored on solid vision, business philosophy and ideology. Their personalities will come and go; there is succession and corporate culture. They are more than just one person.