México

[Kowabunga]

México  (the second most populated country in Latin America) have federal elections today, including the presidential election. AMLO is favourite to win the later. Despite a superficial leftism in AMLO my cynical side (from afar, I am no expert in México) sees a kinda reactionary streak and him surrounded with all the establishment he has vowed to destroy. It seems you fall into the PRI trap dynamics either if you are in the party or attacking the party.

Violence in the streets is not a force for good when talking about keeping healthy democratic systems. In this case México is more "literal" than usual in proving that extent, as more than a hundred of candidates to the election have been killed in the campaign.

 

[Kowabunga]

8 minutes ago, Teso dos Bichos said:

Not my ideal choice but AMLO is a lot better than the rest of the crooked cunts.i trust the Mexican people will make the right choice. 

Don't you think that at some point regardless of the effort put into it and the best wishes one could hold for "the people", one person can't change the system from the inside just by himself?

Maybe it's the cynical part of the parliamentary systems I have grown familiar with, but all this over-the-top "voluntarist decisionism" thrown in campaigns of presidential elections puts me off.

 

[El Profesor]

24 minutes ago, Teso dos Bichos said:

Exactly, AMLO might not have all the answers but I believe he is the best option for the Economy. Sure he will milk the cow but I don't see him being a party puppet like the others. Best option for the middle class.

@El Profesor I don't know if politics is your cup of tea but he is often  compared to Brazil’s former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva? Is that a good thing or bad thing  

Lula is the most divisive and also influent politician in modern brazilian history. People in Brazil either love or hate him. There´s no middle ground and no rationality when it comes to Lula. 

So, I´ll let you guys judge if what I offer is a reasonable view of Lula. I don´t hate him but I´m also not entirely objective when it comes to it. Being a conservative, legalist catholic, I don´t like him. 

In my opinion, Lula is a populist who holds no respect for the laws and for the institutions. He is currently arrested for corruption charges.

Some government programs established by him, like Bolsa Família, were positive. I reckon that. But during his government and Dilma´s government we missed a chance to make the jump in development. We export commodities and with the commodities prices at favorable prices, it was the opportunity to invest in infrastructure, technology and education, and diversify our economy. The public sector and social security needed reforms, which weren´t made and now our capacity of investment is small and with our population quickly aging, the deficits tend to grow even more. 

Yet, in my opinion, the worst legacy of Lula is his divisive discourse. Confronting and mocking middle class for decades ended up radicalizing politics. It was obvious that eventually the right would strike back and with a lot of anger and hatred that they couldn´t express, but now they have an outlet in Bolsonaro, the populist of the right. 

Brazil is a warn to the world. You can have the most beautiful welfare state in your law, but unfortunately it doesn´t mean in practice your citizens will get education, health and security. We´re a failed society and the advice I´d give to any brazilian is to get the hell out of it before it catches fire.

Our present and future is being the farmland of China. We´re an unimportant country in the end of the day.

 

[Kowabunga]

4 minutes ago, El Profesor said:

Lula is the most divisive and also influent politician in modern brazilian history. People in Brazil either love or hate him. There´s no middle ground and no rationality when it comes to Lula. 

So, I´ll let you guys judge if what I offer is a reasonable view of Lula. I don´t hate him but I´m also not entirely objective when it comes to it. Being a conservative, legalist catholic, I don´t like him. 

In my opinion, Lula is a populist who holds no respect for the laws and for the institutions. He is currently arrested for corruption charges.

Some government programs established by him, like Bolsa Família, were positive. I reckon that. But during his government and Dilma´s government we missed a chance to make the jump in development. We export commodities and with the commodities prices at favorable prices, it was the opportunity to invest in infrastructure, technology and education, and diversify our economy. The public sector and social security needed reforms, which weren´t made and now our capacity of investment is small and with our population quickly aging, the deficits tend to grow even more. 

Yet, in my opinion, the worst legacy of Lula is his divisive discourse. Confronting and mocking middle class for decades ended up radicalizing politics. It was obvious that eventually the right would strike back and with a lot of anger and hatred that they couldn´t express, but now they have an outlet in Bolsonaro, the populist of the right. 

Brazil is a warn to the world. You can have the most beautiful welfare state in your law, but unfortunately it doesn´t mean in practice your citizens will get education, health and security. We´re a failed society and the advice I´d give to any brazilian is to get the hell out of it before it catches fire.

Our present and future is being the farmland of China. We´re an unimportant country in the end of the day.

 

As catholic, how do you see the issue of a good part of the radical right activism being "populated" by (the, as in the rest of Latin America, increasing number of) protestant adherents? Is relevant in any way for the (future) political dynamics as another potential vector for division or just a "curiosity"?  Is it a "virtuous competition" between traditional catholic right-wing ideology (let's call it "integrism" for the lack of a better word) and new protestant movements that works well for both sides, or is it about having the hegemony of the fringes of the right?

To some extent that happens with México and the junior partner of AMLO, another radical right evangelical party.

[El Profesor]

4 hours ago, Kowabunga said:

As catholic, how do you see the issue of a good part of the radical right activism being "populated" by (the, as in the rest of Latin America, increasing number of) protestant adherents? Is relevant in any way for the (future) political dynamics as another potential vector for division or just a "curiosity"?  Is it a "virtuous competition" between traditional catholic right-wing ideology (let's call it "integrism" for the lack of a better word) and new protestant movements that works well for both sides, or is it about having the hegemony of the fringes of the right?

To some extent that happens with México and the junior partner of AMLO, another radical right evangelical party.

The link between neo-pentecostalism and the new right is relevant and in my opinion the growth of the right among the poor is in good part explained by it. Christianism, in particular, protestantism is very strong among the lower classes and pastors have a strong role in shaping the political views of the faithful. There are several elected pastors in our Congress.

As the left rapidly abandons traditional marxism and embrace progressivism, the pact between the new right and evangelicals gets stronger. Much like in Europe,  where the real confrontation is between progressivism vs christianism, not muslims vs christians. 

But keep in mind, the Catholic Church of Latin America is very different from the Catholic Church of Spain. Here, there is still a strong influence of marxism in the Catholic Church, which gave birth to the Liberation Theology. Some priests in Brazil, as a famous writer once observed, only look to the sky to see if it is raining. The atheist priests.  They even held a mass before Lula was arrested. 

I guess, to sum up my point, there is no political unity among catholics, and they´re not a relevant part of that alliance beween christians and Bolsonaro.

And can you imagine Nicolás Maduro and Jair Bolsonaro sharing a border? This is a scary proposition, especially because I can still be drafted by the brazilian army. I don´t even want to imagine what modern warfare in the Amazon Jungle would look like.

[El Profesor]

And Cauhtémoc Blanco appears to be new governor of Morelos: 

 

 

[Kowabunga]

It's a sweep. Additionally, regarding the election to the Chamber of Deputies, if the electoral coalition sticks in the Chamber of Deputies (not a given, but being AMLO president I guess there are more odds) it looks like AMLO will also enjoy support from the chamber.

Encuentro Social may be battling for the 2nd/3rd position in number of deputies. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I always worry about politicians that come from reactionary populist movements, they generally have more phrases to spout than policy ideas.

There are a lot of hot spot issues in Mexican politics. You’ve got the violent drug war, basically caused by the drug addiction of their neighbors to the north and the cartels looking to make money off that, which remains the biggest threat to stability in Mexico. Look how many candidates on this election were assassinated by cartels, it’s mental.

Then they’ve got trade worries and their relationship with America, which has taken a big turn under America’s idiot prince at the helm, and their relationship with American business - which has been good for both sides in recent years. And particularly good for towns and cities on the border.

Then the other issue of rampant corruption and cronyism in he Mexican government. And that ties into both the power of the cartels & Mexican businesses and the money they can throw at their politicians.

Those 3 are massive and then you have to consider they’ve also got their own host of normal issues that countries have to deal with. Politics is messy enough, but then you add shit like corruption and murder into it and Mexican politics is like a soap opera.