From recent and narrow triumph of the right candidate Sebastian Pinera in Chile's presidential elections, the opposition press the government of Lula (the majority of the Brazilian press, by the step ...) has offered a kind of feast in which comparative advantage to take the lesson Chilean happy tales in favor of the nomination of "toucan" José Serra, the current governor of Sao Paulo.
These comparisons are based on a series of fallacies that try to analyze one by one:
1) Presidents popularity is not transferable to their candidates .
According to recent opinion polls, President Michelle Bachelet has a 83% public support in Chile for its management, which concludes on March 11, while Lula achieves a negligible 81% of accessions in Brazil. Endorse it or not the support ignores a fundamental fact: in Brazil, the President may request a temporary license in charge of direct support from the " Palanques "of the campaign to their favorite candidate. Which is a very important factor to consider. In Chile, in the period before the second round or second ballot "of presidential elections (from 13 December to 17 January), the President entered fully into the dispute by declaring that it did not matter who won the polls and everyone knew who was their candidate, but this has the same weight, of course, an agent acting clearly saying who posits him as his heir. In Brazil, meanwhile, the latest survey CNT / Sensus shows Minister Dilma Rousseff with 23.5% of voting intentions, against 16.3 I had in March, falling from 45.7 Serra to 40.4 in the same period of time.
2) A candidate with little charisma and imposed from above is necessarily an unsuccessful candidate.
is a fact of the case, and no one disputed that one of the factors that favored in Chile progressive fracture of the block was the election in "primary trout," to put in an elegant way, the presidential candidate of the Concertación . The candidacy of Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle cupular arose from an agreement of the main ruling coalition parties (only opposed the Radical Party, which raised an alternative candidacy.) And also the fact that two potential candidates, such as Ricardo Lagos and José Miguel Insulza, voluntarily resigned his choice. It should be noted, however, that the candidate of the Coalition for Change (formerly Alliance for Chile) was also chosen "finger" by leaders of the UDI and RN, political heirs of the military dictatorship. This does not excuse the "original sin" committed by the Coalition to bring into being a candidate between cocks and midnight, but it is a fact that should be taken into account. Another important point: when in the second round stage imposing a plebiscite, which recalled to the Yes and No to the permanence of Pinochet in power in 1989, raised its candidate Eduardo Frei vote from 29.9 to 48.3 percent, leaving just three percentage points of Piñera in the final count.
3) The Coalition, as the government of President Lula, only would have spent managing, almost without alterations, inherited economic model, whereby the people, preferring the original to the copy, have decided to turn ago.
All empirical data, which can measure the marches and economic trends indicate that this is not so. Successive administrations of the Concertación reduced poverty substantially, and this is not the product solely of the "trickle down" of wealth of the most wealthy, as claimed by economists related to the dictatorship. There were public policies and targeted to achieve the goal of reducing poverty and destitution, even though the rigidity of the inherited economic model and political stalemate that exists largely in Chile, more than 20 years after the end of dictatorship , made it impossible to give other important steps towards reducing inequality, as have occurred in Brazil, where in recent years at least 30 million people have been incorporated into consumption.
4) The coalition had been a victim of the social changes it generates (a thesis that, as is evident, enters open contradiction with the earlier, speaking of reforms merely cosmetic). And it would fatally wrong to suggest in his government program "more and better state, when the spirit of Chileans would be soaked, at this stage of the game, the most pure and hard neoliberalism.
With the Coalition would have consolidated a series of profound changes in Chilean social and cultural fabric. This is what some sociologists have called the advent of aspirational middle class which is known under the nickname "the Faúndez" referring to an advertisement which once showed a "teacher bangs" (that is, a worker manual one) that acted on their own and multiplied its business from that had a cell phone. These entrepreneurs, who do not even reach the size of an SME, have been seduced by the winner of this speech billionaire businessman, who aspires to make Chile a developed country's Bicentennial. The illusion of "free market" is that any earpiece could repeat its success story, based on the sacrifice and effort (and in some cases of insider trading on the market, as some killjoys press likes to remember ...). Especially when you consider that Piñera is a self-made man, but also True, born in a social environment which provided valuable networking and education excellence.
5) The triumph of the right is due to the natural alternation that must exist in a democratic regime. Governing the same for long periods is not healthy or safe for the good civic practices. And, moreover, breeds corruption and patronage. That
alternation, do not believe or them. When were the civilian base of coups in Latin America, the issue of alternating well that did not care. On the other hand, corruption and cronyism are not monopolized by any practical political sector in particular. In municipalities that are under the control of the UDI and RN have also been cases of scandals that have come to light. And in the Federal District of Brazil (ie, in Brasilia), the governor, José Roberto Arruda, a member of DEM (former PFL, which supported the military), is accused of taking black money a "slush funds" organized by entrepreneurs benefit from government tenders.
6) erratic foreign policies (ie, not automatically aligned with the U.S.) and condescending with dictators (Iran, in the case of Brazil, and Cuba, in the case of Chile ...) end up placing both countries ambiguous on land and near the edge of "populism" Chavez.
response to these "New Democrats" Oppenheimer or Vargas Llosa style: apparently only allowed to get along with dictatorships such as that recently enthroned in Honduras, to overthrow a constitutionally elected President (Manuel Zelaya) and then legitimized through Institutional called solutions through highly contested elections.
7) change discourse is a discourse unbeatable. For more than Chileans and Brazilians feel that Lula and Bachelet have done quite well, faced with international economic crisis have beaten both countries collaterally (And this is manifested in all opinion polls), you would need "new blood" to revitalize tired models.
change for change is not always good. It may also be the flag of the reaction and vested interests. On the other hand, I do not know how new are the postulates of promising renewal and removal. In Chile have had to recognize that many of the works that made the coalition are important steps, and they will not reverse progress in many cases. For example, support the important steps taken in the field of social protection (through, for example, the solidarity pillar equity introducing a pension system that until recently was extremely liberal and individualistic), and say they are determined to expand into the middle class. But do not explain why, for example, they never occurred to them to carry out such reforms. In Brazil, for sure, no one in their right mind would propose reversing initiatives such as the PAC or the Plan Bolsa Familia ...
8) fracture progressive blocks, expressed by means of multiple nominations, that would be to channel demands environmental, generational, or simply disruptive to the official discourse of the center-left would win the center-right, on the basis of this proposal is part of the ABC of politics "Divide and conquer."
candidacy in Chile Marco Enríquez-Ominami, although at some point expressed a certain weariness and disappointment with domed and oligarchic forms of politics, ended up petering out in the ambiguity of a champion to be almost grotesque exercise in balance not to antagonize with their bases of support and support, which in some cases had radically conflicting interests. The late and erratic adherence Marco Frei's candidacy in the runoff election, where even avoided calling his name so he could not reproduce their support for the electoral fringe freísta, eventually became a shot in the foot, as it did look bad with Moors and Christians. And set aside for the moment, and for a while, your chances of becoming a feasible alternative and progressive articulation of the leadership turnover. In Brazil, meanwhile, we have the green socialist Marina Silva and Ciro Gomes, alternative platforms to Dilma Rousseff. Although in the case of Cyrus is clear identification with the left and does not support serristas nuances or delusions.
9) axes of the past (that is, antinomies such as democracy or dictatorship and oligarchy versus humble people ...) no longer continue to divide our citizens who have decided to face the future looking forward and not the rearview mirror (as naively expressed Marco Enríquez-Ominami candidate during his campaign, making statements that reproduced at the foot of the letter, the traditional discourse on the right). That
that the past is buried and no one cares, only part of the rhetoric of this "new right", that is no different, indeed, much of the old. It would be what the Americans call a "wishful thinking" that is, wishful thinking, but nothing more. If anyone thinks that a blanket of forgetfulness has fallen on the last of the "leaden years", I recommend you refer to a master text of Marcelo Rubens Paiva writer, the son of a missing politician in Brazil, published in the "State" of Sao Paulo.
10) Public safety and the fight without truce and without concessions to the crime is the new program axis ordering conservative discourse, in the absence of the Cold War and domestic rival ideology, which articulated and justified in the past insurgency strategies.
enemies remain, of course, the poor, dirty and bad as ever, the " Flaites " of Chile and " favelas" of Brazil, but this may no longer wear the olive green uniform fearful of subversion Marxist but elusive and diffuse the drug. And, if possible, should unite in one bag inseparable, as in the case of Colombia, where Alvaro Uribe, a close friend of Sebastian Piñera speaks of the "narco" opposed to his policy of "democratic security", generously funded by the Pentagon.
* Note: Steeped as I am, in the lazy summer, I decided to upload this blog another article of Professor Patrick Chena ineffable. To give continuity to the case ... Therefore, he is responsible for this string of nonsense, not me, I will continue to rest in some unknown South American beach
0 comments:
Post a Comment