How the Radical Right Takeover in Brazil Has Parallels With Trumpism

Lambert here: I take issue with “Trumpism,” here and elsewhere, because I fail to see how Trump’s policies and actions are distinguishable from the decades-long thrust of conservative policies generally, except to the extent that Trump is often out front about things his party thinks are better left unsaid. That said, it’s good to have news from Brazil. (If one were to refer to Trump as (putative) caudillo, a separate discussion, presumably the word would be not “Trumpism” but “Trumpismo.”)

By Anne Vigna, a journalist for Le Monde diplomatique based in Rio de Janeiro. Cross-posted from Alternet.

There was victory in the air at the opening of the Liberty Forum in Porto Alegre this April. The city is known outside Brazil as the first municipality to come under the control of the leftwing Workers’ Party (PT) in 1998 and as birthplace of the World Social Forum, but has also hosted this annual meeting of Brazil’s ultra-liberal right for 30 years; the forum used to be restricted to insiders, but has now turned into a jamboree.

With the 2,600-seat auditorium full throughout the event, the speakers were happy: ‘Neoliberal thought has never figured so prominently in public debate,’ said Helio Beltrão, president of the Mises Institute Brazil, a thinktank that is officially apolitical but follows economist Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973), a major figure in the Austrian School. ‘We got thousands of young people out into the streets to demonstrate against the PT, and drove the left out of power. For the first time, I feel we can win the 2018 presidential election.’

This may not be an idle boast. After 13 years of PT hegemony, a hard right is governing Brazil without being elected. Former vice-president Michel Temer, who became president after Dilma Rousseff was impeached last August, is following the forum’s neoliberal map, with an amendment to the constitution that limits public spending growth to the rate of inflation in the previous year; privatisations; greater flexibility in labour legislation; plans to reform pensions that will deprive many of a pension; and a narrower definition of slave labour, still widespread in Brazil.

This year’s forum was opened by the new mayor of São Paulo, businessman João Doria of the rightwing Brazilian Social Democracy Party (PSDB). Doria presented himself as an entrepreneur who works 15 hours a day. His plans included ‘lower taxes, less market regulation and zero restrictions on free enterprise.’ He also promised to privatise as soon as possible those areas of public services still under public management (including parks and sports stadiums), so as to eliminate ‘slowness and bureaucracy in public administration … I am changing the habits of the political world by using Uber instead of official cars,’ he declared to loud applause.

Doria is a favourite of Brazil’s new right, which sociologist Laurent Delcourt calls a ‘tropical Tea Party’, after the anti-tax movement in the US. He embodies the myth of the self-made man from a humble background, and has won support from the working class in São Paulo’s suburbs and privileged residents of its smarter neighbourhoods by describing himself as an ‘honest worker’. Doria ended every rally of his 2016 election campaign with a message to his PT opponent, Fernando Haddad: ‘Let him go and show himself in Cuba.’

Cold War Rhetoric

Rhetoric that recalls the cold war is characteristic of this new right. As in the past, the enemy is communism, trying to take control of Brazil through the PT. Rodrigo Tellechea Silva, a former director of the Entrepreneurial Studies Institute (IEE) said, quite seriously: ‘The Bolivarian ideology of the PT has infiltrated culture, education, NGOs and a large section of our youth. If we had not managed to impeach President Rousseff, Brazil would be communist today.’ He seems to have forgotten that former PT leader Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (‘Lula’, president 2003-10) charmed both the stock market and the favelas.

Many of the young who attended the forum were wearing clothes from Vista Direita (Look Right), a brand that offers an anti-communist range, including t-shirts with slogans such as ‘Be cool, not communist’ and ‘Communism has been killing since 1917’. Most were members of the Brazilian branch of Students for Liberty, a global neoliberal organisation present in Brazilian universities since 2010. In 2014 it gave rise to the Free Brazil Movement (MBL), which led the calls for Rousseff’s impeachment from the moment she was re-elected that year. The MBL’s young leaders are setting a new trend in Brazilian politics. They are known for sarcasm, insulting their opponents and violent rhetoric. In April 2015 a key figure, Kim Kataguiri, said: ‘We must not stop at wounding the PT, we need to put a bullet through its head.’

Brazil’s radical right is surfing a wave of polarisation and anti-PT sentiment that has been growing since June 2013. That year saw the biggest demonstrations since the end of the military dictatorship in 1985. The demands were initially for greater investment in public transport, healthcare and education. Delcourt said: ‘Unexpectedly, the right demonstrating at the time brought together two major currents: one extreme, in other words identitarian and racist, the other neoliberal. Together they managed to take over the protest movement, and turn it into opposition to the PT, especially by harnessing the theme of the fight against corruption.’ Just 10 days after the movement was launched, the demonstrators’ targets were no longer just budget cuts and the lack of public services, but also public buildings in Brasília (the seat of the federal government) and any symbol of the PT or of a political world they denounced as corrupt.

In 2015 the inquiry into corruption at the state oil company, Petrobras, revealed a system of illegal financing of political parties that involved major construction and public works enterprises. Every party in Brazil was mentioned as Petrobras senior executives began their testimony, but media and the prosecutors conducting the inquiry initially focused only on the accusations concerning the PT, which had been in government since 2003; they claimed it had invented the system.

Privileged and White

The demonstrators were less and less representative of the average Brazilian: according to surveys by sociologists from the Federal University São Paulo (Unifesp), they were white, urban and from privileged backgrounds. Esther Solano, in charge of the surveys, said: ‘The aim for 90% of these demonstrators was to bring down the PT. They were opposed to its social programmes: the flagship family allowance, the reservation of university places for black, Amerindian or mixed-race Brazilians, and even the More Doctors programme, which recruited medical practitioners from Cuba. Their rhetoric called for meritocracy rather than welfare dependency, which they said was the mark of the PT.’

Hatred of the PT and what it represents can be seen on social networks in the mockery of people from Brazil’s Northeast region. They are portrayed as retarded, lazy or scroungers, in a mix of racism (northern Brazil is blacker than the south) and classism that is sometimes expressed openly. In the eyes of its well-born detractors, the PT is guilty of having given certain rights to people historically discriminated against, and so eroding the privileges of the more affluent.

Besides allowing these former social outcasts to travel by air (many of Brazil’s wealthy did not like sharing the same plane), the PT made an irreparable error in 2015 when it got legislation passed requiring employers to declare their domestic employees, pay them a minimum wage and observe legal limits on their hours. Delcourt said that anti-PT feeling binds the privileged together ‘like cement, just as anti-communism was the uniting factor for opposition to the leftwing government of President João Goulart, deposed by the military coup of 1964. It’s the same social class, white and privileged, who demonstrated against Goulart in the 60s and more recently against Rousseff.’

Though far-right activists calling for the military to return to power were a minority in 2015, most demonstrators favoured a more repressive policy. According to Solano, ‘70-80% of survey respondents supported harsher sentences for criminal offences, and a reduction of the age of criminal responsibility to 16. They also expressed great admiration for prominent figures in the justice system, and for the federal police, who were leading an inquiry into corruption that seemed to be focused on the PT alone.’

Camozzato ‘Knew Nothing about Politics’

The data confirmed the results of polls conducted between 2010 and 2016 by Ibope (Brazilian Institute of Public Opinion and Statistics), to measure conservative values in Brazilian society. Support for lowering the age of criminal responsibility rose from 63% to 78%; support for the death penalty from 31% to 49%; and the ratio of respondents who considered themselves strongly conservative from 49% to 59%. Political scientist Maurício Santoro of Rio de Janeiro State University said: ‘Under these conditions, it was to be expected. Since the end of the dictatorship, there has never been a time when conservative parliamentary groups, those defending the interests of the big landowners, evangelical Christians and the army have been so strongly represented in the National Congress.’

The popular demonstrations began to infiltrate Brazil’s institutions. At the municipal elections of October 2016, the MBL, which until then described itself as civic and apolitical, presented 45 candidates on a range of tickets. Ten were elected as municipal councillors, and one as mayor of Monte Sião (population 25,000) in Minas Gerais state. At Porto Alegre, Felipe Camozzato was elected councillor for the New Party (PN), which has links to the MBL: ‘Until 2015 I knew nothing about politics. I had no interest in it,’ he said, laughing. Camozzato joined the opposition to the PT when he and friends formed a batucada band they called The Crazy Liberal Gang. They took the tune from a football chant and gave it new words: ‘Weep, Bolivarian PT-ist’; it was sung at demonstrations in 2015. Camozzato said: ‘When [Rousseff] came to Porto Alegre, we used to stand under her window and sing all night to prevent her from sleeping.’

The notoriety Camozzato gained from this kind of provocation helped his election campaign, which was based on a single issue: to stop public funding for political parties. In 2015 the Supreme Court banned private financing of political organisations after the Petrobras corruption scandal broke. Until then, 70% of funding had come from the private sector; now the amount allocated to a public fund to finance campaigns is decided by the congress before elections. Next year, when Brazil will hold elections for president, state governors and members of national and local assemblies, the fund will be $350m. ‘It’s not right,’ said Camozzato. ‘Parties should find their own funding, like businesses.’

Camozzato, now 29, admits he understands nothing about his city’s problems, but he does claim to have searched the municipal regulations for anything that might hinder free enterprise. He has defended the right of ‘righteous citizens’ to bear arms, and attacked ‘judges motivated by Marxist ideology’ for granting bail to defendants. In August he called activists of the Homeless Workers’ Movement (MTST) ‘bandits’ and ‘good-for-nothings’. Raúl Pont, 73, a co-founder of the PT and former mayor of Porto Alegre, said: ‘MBL supporters are very good at spreading hate. And people follow them. Last year, for the first time in my life, I was attacked by a group of angry youths, who called me a communist and a Bolshevik.’

Attacks linked to the MBL happen mostly on social networks, where the organisation claims to have more than 2.5 million followers, and where it repeats the propaganda published on its ‘news’ websites. Brazil is familiar with ideological bias in major media, and has many websites where aggression triumphs over journalistic rigour. Conservative sites outdo the rest. The sociologists from Unifesp found that 71% of respondents believed former president Lula’s eldest son was the owner of JBS-Friboi, one of the biggest meat processing multinationals, while 53% thought that Brazil’s largest criminal gang, First Capital Command (PCC), acted as the armed wing of the PT.

Attacks on Media

In July Brazil’s investigative journalism association, Abraji, reacted to these sites’ repeated attacks on journalists. For example, the MBL had attacked Agência Publica, an investigative journalism site, because it had exposed the errors in an MBL video on crime, and the MBL had accused Agência Pública of being ‘far-left activists disguised as journalists’.

One of the political leaders most successful with this rhetoric is Federal Deputy Jair Bolsonaro, a major figure of Brazil’s far right who is running second in opinion polls as a presidential candidate, though he has only 16% of voting intentions, according to a September poll. Bolsonaro, a former army captain, has been in public office since 1990. He has yet to distinguish himself in his parliamentary career, but has acquired a high media profile.

During the congress vote on Rousseff’s impeachment in April 2016, broadcast live on television, Bolsonaro justified his vote for impeachment as being a stand ‘against communism, for the armed forces and for the memory of Colonel Carlos Alberto Brilhante Ustra, Dilma Rousseff’s worst nightmare.’ Brilhante Ustra tortured Rousseff (then a member of a far-left organisation) for 22 days in 1970, when she was arrested for her political activities. The courts condemned Bolsonaro for derogatory statements on women, black people and homosexuals, but ‘today he is the most popular politician on Facebook, with more than 4 million followers,’ said sociologist Pablo Ortellano.

Bolsonaro welcomed recent statements by General Antônio Hamilton Martins Mourão that terrified Brazil’s population, and not just the victims of the military dictatorship (1964-85): ‘Either the institutions solve the political problem through the courts, removing those elements involved in illegal acts from public life, or we will have to impose the solution.’ He said that all his high command colleagues agreed with him. A few days later, army commander General Eduardo Villas Bôas, claimed that the constitution allowed the military to intervene in the event of chaos.

Historian Maud Chirio wrote: ‘Of course the 1988 constitution, drafted after the end of the dictatorship, doesn’t permit the armed forces to intervene in politics autonomously. But President Michel Temer is so weakened by an approval rating near zero that he no longer has the authority to impose his will on the army’.

Dreams of the New Lower Middle Class

The rightwing movements (far right, neoliberal right, classic right) are fighting over the PT’s traditional voter base, especially in the outskirts of cities, where the standard of living has risen over the past decade — thanks to the left. Sociologist William Nozaki said: ‘The new lower middle class dream of being entrepreneurs and consumers.’ He coordinated a study by the Perseu Abramo Foundation (linked to the PT) to understand why the party had lost ground in the São Paulo suburbs when Doria was elected. ‘They are very sensitive to the meritocracy rhetoric of the right and the evangelical churches, and less affected by the PT message, which is still aimed at the poor.’ A majority in the outer suburbs of Rio de Janeiro voted for Bolsonaro and new mayor Marcelo Crivella (Brazilian Republican Party, right), a bishop in the evangelical Universal Church of the Kingdom of God.

The evangelical churches are far better established in poor areas than the Catholic Church, and promote a largely conservative and individualist worldview. To win over these voters, the liberal right has widened its targets to include contemporary art. In September the MBL forced the closure of the Queermuseuexhibition: out of 264 works, three were, according to the young liberals, ‘apologies for paedophilia, zoophilia and blasphemy against Christian culture.’ The MBL also attacked the São Paulo Museum of Modern Art over a performance featuring male nudity. Ortellano said: ‘It’s a strategy that looks forward to the coming elections. They have realised that cultural warfare is an excellent vector for mobilisation, and that a rhetoric which is hostile to the feminist, black and LGBT movements can be a way to win conservatives over to the liberal cause.’

According to the Unifesp sociologists, who repeated their survey during São Paulo’s traditional March for Jesus, which attracted nearly a million participants, the evangelicals are not susceptible to liberal ideas. Solano said: ‘The faithful don’t know where they stand, right or left. Those are concepts that don’t mean anything to them. They describe themselves as conservative, but that doesn’t mean they approve of Michel Temer’s economic programme.’ Yet this may not be peculiar to evangelicals.

There is no guarantee that the radicalisation of the right will bring electoral success. Opinion polls show that the people of Brazil are opposed to the government’s proposed labour and pension reforms. Solano said: ‘We also observed this during the demonstrations in favour of Rousseff’s impeachment. The vast majority are not in favour of small government. They want better education and healthcare.’ This should temper the confidence of the Liberty Forum’s ultra-liberals. Though the far right, military and civilian, now speaks its mind freely, though the classic and neoliberal right is in government, and though the right that wants to regenerate the government promises to be even more radical, Lula still leads the polls for the presidential election, with more than 35% of voting intentions.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
This entry was posted in Banana republic, Guest Post, Politics on by .

About Lambert Strether

Readers, I have had a correspondent characterize my views as realistic cynical. Let me briefly explain them. I believe in universal programs that provide concrete material benefits, especially to the working class. Medicare for All is the prime example, but tuition-free college and a Post Office Bank also fall under this heading. So do a Jobs Guarantee and a Debt Jubilee. Clearly, neither liberal Democrats nor conservative Republicans can deliver on such programs, because the two are different flavors of neoliberalism (“Because markets”). I don’t much care about the “ism” that delivers the benefits, although whichever one does have to put common humanity first, as opposed to markets. Could be a second FDR saving capitalism, democratic socialism leashing and collaring it, or communism razing it. I don’t much care, as long as the benefits are delivered. To me, the key issue — and this is why Medicare for All is always first with me — is the tens of thousands of excess “deaths from despair,” as described by the Case-Deaton study, and other recent studies. That enormous body count makes Medicare for All, at the very least, a moral and strategic imperative. And that level of suffering and organic damage makes the concerns of identity politics — even the worthy fight to help the refugees Bush, Obama, and Clinton’s wars created — bright shiny objects by comparison. Hence my frustration with the news flow — currently in my view the swirling intersection of two, separate Shock Doctrine campaigns, one by the Administration, and the other by out-of-power liberals and their allies in the State and in the press — a news flow that constantly forces me to focus on matters that I regard as of secondary importance to the excess deaths. What kind of political economy is it that halts or even reverses the increases in life expectancy that civilized societies have achieved? I am also very hopeful that the continuing destruction of both party establishments will open the space for voices supporting programs similar to those I have listed; let’s call such voices “the left.” Volatility creates opportunity, especially if the Democrat establishment, which puts markets first and opposes all such programs, isn’t allowed to get back into the saddle. Eyes on the prize! I love the tactical level, and secretly love even the horse race, since I’ve been blogging about it daily for fourteen years, but everything I write has this perspective at the back of it.


  1. Disturbed Voter

    “The vast majority are not in favour of small government.” … correct also in the US. We differ on who to apply large government. Only anarchs-capitalists want small government. The US is not returning to the 1920s … the 1940s perhaps ;-(

  2. Louis Fyne

    It’s the same the world over….(at the executive level) the self-labeled “liberal,” “progressive” parties and media only offer virtue-signalling, quota-filled, social liberalism.

    People are turning to a reactionary conservative for a whole mix of reasons—there are true believers, new believers and people who just are fed up and want an alternative, even if (or perhaps especially if) it means blowing up the Establishment and extending a big middle finger to the media.

    Poland, Brazil, Czech Republic, Italy, Hungary, France’s National Front are all symptoms.

    1. RabidGandhi

      Just a note: the “liberalism” in the article refers to liberal in the South American sense, not as used in the US. In South America, a liberal is someone who believes businesses should be “liberated” from regulations and public control, supporting mass privatisations and deregulation: ie., what you Yanks refer to as “libertarianism”, but in the case of Brasil, without the social liberties aspect.

      To further muddy the waters, down here, a “libertarian” is a social libertarian or an anarcho-syndicalist. And if anyone is really interested in being headswimmingly confused, someday we can discuss the rightwing Radical and Socialist parties.

  3. johnnygl

    This LRB article from last year is one of the best that i’ve seen regarding brazilian politics as a kind of guide to ‘how we got here’. When you look at the record of the PT under dilma and lula, it will remind you of how the clinton/obama model of governance operated, failed, and enabled the rise of the hard right.

    Now, the PT is as decimated and ruderless as the democratic party here in the usa.

    1. johnnygl

      Tell me this doesn’t sound like the corporate dems:

      “Purchase of electronics, white goods and vehicles was fanned (cars through tax incitements), while the water supply, paved roads, efficient buses, acceptable sewage disposal, decent schools and hospitals were neglected. Collective goods had neither ideological nor practical priority. So along with much needed, genuine improvements in domestic living conditions, consumerism in its deteriorated sense spread downwards through the social hierarchy from a middle class besotted, even by international standards, with magazines and malls.”

      1. johnnygl

        I last visited Brazil in 2011, at what was basically the height of PT triumphalism. The exchange rate was brutally overvalued, choking the life out of industry. There were signs of credit excess all around, with lots of new cars and motorcycles scattered around my wife’s working class neighborhood. It was bound to end badly, as credit booms always do!!!

        1. JohnnyGL

          If the lead problems in Flint, MI symbolized everything that’s wrong with today’s Democratic Party (yes, I know there was bi-partisanship throughout state govt, but the Dems at the nat’l level just weren’t very interested in solving real-world problems), then I’d posit there are parallels with the sewage disposal in Guanabara Bay in Rio as symbolic of PT failure.

          Lula/Dilma should have made a national show of cleaning up the sewage disposal in Brazil’s iconic city in time for the Olympics, but they didn’t get it done and it’s not clear to me that they really tried all that hard.

          Now, I’m certainly not going to claim it’s all the PT’s fault, as that would mean echoing the right-wing talking points of the PMDB and PSDB coup-mongers. I’m only saying it was a massive opportunity to demonstrate that the PT stood for ‘getting things done’ and they blew it and that’s why there was such subdued opposition when the coup-plotters started closing in.

          1. JohnnyGL

            Apologies for dominating this thread, but the shorter version is this:

            You cannot explain the rise of the hard-right, in the USA or Brazil, without laying out the context. The groundwork was laid by the failure of Brazil’s PT, much as it was by the failure of the Democratic Party.

            1. Louis Fyne

              c’mon, it’s so much easier to rage at a Trump tweet than admitting that your side screwed up big time, failed to deliver and solidified the status quo instead of rolling it back in 2009-.

  4. DJG

    I’m not sure that I’ll grant you the concept of “caudillo,” which is from the Spanish-speaking world. Brazil has had autocrats, but of a different style. I’m thinking of the eccentric Getulio Vargas and his Estado Novo, modeled after the Portuguese dictatorship. Vargas ended up killing himself–all very Brazilian.

    I note in the article the repeated mention of the deleterious influence of the evangelical churches. (And we aren’t talking Brazil’s sizable Lutheran church here.) Evangelical Christianity is one of the most pernicious exports of the U.S. of A. And seeing its effects on Brazil, maybe it is time for that national American conversation on religion that isn’t really religion.

    To me, this is the salient observation: “Delcourt said that anti-PT feeling binds the privileged together ‘like cement, just as anti-communism was the uniting factor for opposition to the leftwing government of President João Goulart, deposed by the military coup of 1964. It’s the same social class, white and privileged, who demonstrated against Goulart in the 60s and more recently against Rousseff.’”

    These is the same social class that *asked* the military to overthrow the government of Brazil in 1964, and democratic government didn’t return for some 21 years. I seem to recall photos of some nice white ladies holding rosaries kneeling in the streets waiting for the military to save them from the depredations of Goulart, a democratic socialist.

    So if we are going to talk about “Trumpism,” what we should be having our national conversation about is the toxic blend of nationalism, evangelical religion, fear of modernity, economic fantasies, and race–all with the national Gini quotient up top. Check out the Gini quotients for the U.S. and Brazil. Definitive.

    1. JohnnyGL

      “Check out the Gini quotients for the U.S. and Brazil. Definitive.” – Seconded. Colonialism didn’t die, it just reinvented itself.

      In some ways, I feel like the US is headed in a very Brazilian direction. Of course, Brazil’s always been there, but we’re trying to catch up with their level of overt corruption, rampant inequality, elite criminal lawlessness, and land-grabbing gentrification intertwined with police violence.

      1. Knifecatcher

        When I lived in Brazil in the mid-late ’90s I remember being appalled by the inequality. I remember vividly one area in a major city divided into city block sized estates. Each estate had a 10 foot tall wall topped with razor wire and broken glass, and usually patrolled by one or more “Fila Brasileira” dogs – an enormous Mastiff bred specifically for guard duty.

        The rich people living inside the wall would come and go in expensive imported cars via an electronic gate. Meanwhile on the outside shanties were propped up against the wall for support. Enormous wealth and crushing poverty, separated by a row of concrete blocks, made for quite a juxtaposition.

        20 years later you can walk around any major US city and see the same thing, though we don’t even let our poor build a shack to keep the rain off. Property values and all that.

        1. JohnnyGL

          When I needed to enter a bank branch, the security was on par with what you’d expect to enter a high-security prison in the US.

          Apparently, cyber-security is really trigger happy, too. They lock down your checking account if you do even the slightest of unusual things like logging in from a different computer.

          Not that I think it’s necessarily unwarranted, apparently, bank fraud is rampant. It’s worth recalling the level of sophistication involved in robbing the Central Bank of Fortaleza in 2005! :) I’m sure they’ve inspired many others.

    2. Olivier

      “Evangelical Christianity is one of the most pernicious exports of the U.S. of A” Absolutely. And since queer bashing was mentioned in the original posting as a component of the toxic brew in Brazil, have a look at what evangelicals have wrought in Uganda.

    3. Knifecatcher

      As a young man I spent some time in Brazil and became uncomfortably familiar with the Brazilian style evangelical churches. The “Universal Church of the Kingdom of God” or “Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus” cited in the article was (and probably still is) the most batshit crazy of a loony bunch, and ran a pay for salvation racket that would make Joel Osteen blush.

      If the MBL is targeting that population as a power base you can expect tactics, rhetoric, and positions that make Donald Trump look like Jimmy Carter by comparison.

    4. RabidGandhi

      The term “caudillo” has also taken on a different connotation in English than its meaning in Spanish, where it actually refers to a social leader who champions the poor/weak against oppression by the powerful/rich.

      I flinch whenever I see Trump called a caudillo, since he’s the exact opposite, but whatevs; we bastardise more than our fair share of English words too.

  5. financial matters

    Thanks for this article and comments.

    It is indeed sad to see South America, which has been exploited for hundreds of years, continue this ‘slave labor’ model which austerity policies are also inducing in Europe and North American.

    I think that it’s important work the author is doing in trying to parse out the conflicting attitudes of meritocracy, individualism and identity politics that can be fostered by religious and economic groups with those of fairness and compassion which can also be fostered by religious and economic groups.

    I also agree that class is very important. “”It’s the same social class, white and privileged, who demonstrated against Goulart in the 60s and more recently against Rousseff.’””

    I think it’s important to try and dispel the notion that this privilege is based on merit and focus on a more egalitarian outlook.

    I think the focus should be on affordable health care and providing decent paying jobs rather than on just promoting entrepreneurship.

  6. Thuto

    Anti-corruption is the de facto trojan horse the right uses to sweep to power and “self-made men/women” are its poster boys/girls.

    1. RabidGandhi

      Yes, and MBL was particularly vocal about calling Dilma corrupt (even though she was clearly not), while remaining deafeningly silent about the blatant corruption in the Temer administration and PSDB in particular. One would be inclined to think that they were fighting on crass partisan grounds instead of fighting corruption per se, but that couldn’t be because MBL is so slickly marketed as “non-partisan”.

  7. yamahog

    The basis of right wing thought is that social stratification is natural and appropriate. Leftists make life too good for the dependent poor and the working poor resent losing ground and vote for right wing politicians who acknowledge the issues. The lesson here is that it’s probably more agreeable to lift all boats than just the boats that matter to the progressive stack order.

    The lesson here is that concrete, universal, material benefits are a winning policy and divisive affirmative action, anti-salvation thinking wins until it looses badly and empowers the far right.

  8. José

    Great thread and comments.

    I’ve been living in Brazil since the late 90’s and I do think that this is the country of the future (“País do Futuro”) – in the sense that the economic model of extreme inequality prevailing here is the reference that the US and to a lesser degree Europe are actively trying to reach.

    Come here and you’ll see how the US will probably look like in 10 or 20 years.

  9. RabidGandhi

    Rancid headline. The article never mentions Trump– as it shouldn’t because there is no clear nexus between Trump and the rightwing resurgence in South America.

    The blame here is all on Alternet (a pathological headline violation recidivist), as the original in Le Monde Diplomatique ran under the title “In Brasil, the Crisis Galvanises the Rightists”.

    Also of note, is the article depends a lot on research already published in August by the Intercept’s Lee Fang, who since being the first to ask HRC about her Goldman speeches, seems to be the internet’s new favourite plagiaree.

  10. Buckeye

    Unless people actually stand up and stop the extremists by every means available, instead of whining and surrendering. God forbid!

    1. yamahog

      Why not stop extremism by getting rid of the factors that persuade people to embrace radical politics? If the status quo worked better for more people, more people would support it.

      I don’t know if you’re dog whistling #Resist but that’s hardly a panacea – what we see now is the consequence of resisting people’s thoughts in public. They’re still welcome to express those thoughts privately in a voting booth and then we get mutual radicalization.

  11. Dirk77

    I’d like to hear more about the public funding of elections in Brazil, the forces against it, and whether it has had any effect on elections.

Comments are closed.