2018 Brazilian Presidential Election

[WA ROO]

This guy talked a big game on government corruption (like Trump).

His mate Trump was all talk and has actively increased corruption in Washington so I'm not holding my breath. More likely that he does what Trump did and just puts large corporate CEOs and industry lobbyists in charge of everything.

Are Bolsonaro and Trump mates?

 

[smokingjacket]

Lets only talk about parties who actually have power and have to implement it. Any group can say anything when they dont have power. Particularly when the only way to get power is through democracy.

There are plenty of marxist parties who have gained power and have no influence from the Us and arent democratic. Russia, china and cuba for starters. All completely seperate marxist groups. None of them even considered democracy and not one of them had any influence from the usa. Can you answer why?

Again, why do I have to give you a history lesson? You could go to the wikipedia Communism page, spend 30 minutes, they will tell you the same thing. I keep getting dragged in to these rage responses because your posts are like you've grown up in a historical and ideological vaccuum.

Different communist tendencies had different approaches to democracy for all different reasons. There were communist groups who believed in a radical democracy beyond what we have in the West, where all economic decisions are democratised; Luxemburgist democratic-communists who were part of the Social-Democratic Party of Germany (still a major party in Germany), and the democratic Communist Party of Germany; democratic Trotskyists; libertarian socialists etc. If you want a modern example of a group in power they're pretty few on the ground after the Cold War but the best example is Rojava or the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria which is an anarcho-communist federation of civilian councils in Kurdistan based on the political theories of Murray Bookchin. On the other side there were groups who believed there should only be one revolutionary party but governed through different types of 'democracy' like decentralised workers councils, or democratic centralism where there's a binding democracy but only for the party members. When pressed on democratic freedoms the Chinese Communist Party says they have their own type of democracy which ensures stability or something along those lines. The idea being that 'in theory' party members rise through the ranks of the bureaucracy through an intensely meritocratic system and party members as the holders of the revolution or whatever vote as representatives for their regions for the good of the country. That is obviously not how it works in practice.

The major thing that changed was Leninism, which was a theory of power that rejected electoralism (waiting for the people to rise up as favoured by Trotsky) in favour of Bolshevism, where a revolutionary vanguard would seize power and institute a dictatorship of the proletariat to begin the transition to socialism. This was and remains extremely controversial with incredibly tedious people who still argue about it.
Reasons:
1.Russia was the first, Leninism became the first model for how to seize power so many groups adopted that approach as the only known method for a communist revolution
2. Lenin was more pragmatic than some of the idealistic cadres and surmised that after preaching for all these years about how the nobility, the capitalists and the priests were screwing everyone, the most powerful people in society weren't about to open their arms and say yes please strip us of all our wealth, we deserve it. After the Bolsheviks took over, an international coalition known as the White Army which consisted of all opposed to the communists within the Russian Empire, and anti-communist nations including the US, British, Canadian and Australian troops (also Japanese, French, Italian, Chinese and others) fought the Red Army until most of Russia was annihilated and 10 million people had died from a combination of war, famine and disease.

So yes, the US had a fairly prominent role in trying to overthrow the fledgling USSR. Just as the US was the largest backer of Chiang Kai-Shek the fascist warlord of the KMT opposed to Mao in the Chinese Civil War, and I mean Cuba are you kidding me? Cuba is almost a bad stereotype of US intervention from the beginning as a US mafia puppet state, through to attempting to assassinate Castro dozens of times, the Bay of Pigs invasion, and then a economic blockade that lasted from 1968 through to the Obama Presidency.

I don't want to do another history of communism post please just look it up before you post something stupid.

 

[Gough]

I wonder if the modern conservative's passionate concern for the rights of gays and women in Islamic countries will extend to the gays and woman of Brazil if this guy is true to his word.

 

[Todman]

Cuba is almost a bad stereotype of US intervention from the beginning as a US mafia puppet state, through to attempting to assassinate Castro dozens of times, the Bay of Pigs invasion, and then a economic blockade that lasted from 1968 through to the Obama Presidency. I don't want to do another history of communism post please just look it up before you post something stupid.

638 Ways to Kill Castro is a Channel 4 documentary film, broadcast in the United Kingdom on 28 November 2006, which tells the story of some of the numerous attempts of the Central Intelligence Agency to kill Cuba's leader Fidel Castro.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

I wonder if the modern conservative's passionate concern for the rights of gays and women in Islamic countries will extend to the gays and woman of Brazil if this guy is true to his word.

How dark are Brazillians?

 

[Fat Yak]

I wonder if the modern conservative's passionate concern for the rights of gays and women in Islamic countries will extend to the gays and woman of Brazil if this guy is true to his word.

I will dump on any one who targets Jews, gays and women or brown ppl for that matter that have done nothing wrong. Religious nutters are fair game.

 

[quotemokc]

 

[smokingjacket]

638 Ways to Kill Castro is a Channel 4 documentary film, broadcast in the United Kingdom on 28 November 2006, which tells the story of some of the numerous attempts of the Central Intelligence Agency to kill Cuba's leader Fidel Castro.

Haven't seen it, is it worth a look? I find Channel 4 documentaries tend to either extreme of quality

 

[smokingjacket]

I will dump on any one who targets Jews, gays and women or brown ppl for that matter that have done nothing wrong. Religious nutters are fair game.

You think he's lying? Doesn't seem the sort if for mine. One of the many ways he's unlike Trump. You're placing a lot of faith on hunch for about a guy who has had the same politics his whole adult life.

 

[Lebbo73]

Suddenly I like the guy!

I wonder if the modern conservative's passionate concern for the rights of gays and women in Islamic countries will extend to the gays and woman of Brazil if this guy is true to his word.

What’s the point in false outrage an emotion when there’s nothing you can do about it anyway Gough?

 

[Benny78]

Lol great now Brazil have a jewish President too.

Absolutely great to see the way the world is going. The masses want to shine shoes so may as well let them.

 

[DaRick]

How dark are Brazillians?

I know you were being facetious, but they vary greatly in terms of skin colour.

Most of the Southerners are whites, of Italian/German/Eastern European extraction.

On Bolsonaro, it will be interesting to see if he moderates himself once faced with the realities of governance or whether he really does become a fascist, as per the left's fears.

 

[WA ROO]

On Bolsonaro, it will be interesting to see if he moderates himself once faced with the realities of governance or whether he really does become a fascist, as per the left's fears.

Won't matter
He has been labelled a fascist so from now on everything he does will be fascism

 

[smokingjacket]

I know you were being facetious, but they vary greatly in terms of skin colour.

Most of the Southerners are whites, of Italian/German/Eastern European extraction.

On Bolsonaro, it will be interesting to see if he moderates himself once faced with the realities of governance or whether he really does become a fascist, as per the left's fears.

Hey woah, steady on you're missing a fairly large point here. This has nothing to do with the lefts fear. He himself claims he's a student of the military government. He claims he's authoritarian. He claims he wants to kill and torture his political opponents and those he considers ungodly degenerates. He claims he wants to punish the minorities and kill the black poor. In strictly political science terms, the correct way to describe his politics is fascist. Obviously a fairly loaded term but this isn't some anarchist squat definition of a fascist, he has the DECLARED politics of General Franco.

 

[DaRick]

Hey woah, steady on you're missing a fairly large point here. This has nothing to do with the lefts fear. He himself claims he's a student of the military government. He claims he's authoritarian. He claims he wants to kill and torture his political opponents and those he considers ungodly degenerates. He claims he wants to punish the minorities and kill the black poor. In strictly political science terms, the correct way to describe his politics is fascist. Obviously a fairly loaded term but this isn't some anarchist squat definition of a fascist, he has the DECLARED politics of General Franco.

Oh I get your point, but there's a difference between spouting fascist or reactionary rhetoric (which I don't deny that he has done, hence why I said that he appeared to be an exaggerated version of Trump) and actually being a fascist once in power.

The fairly nutty left-winger George Galloway (of all people) seems to understand the difference.

 

[smokingjacket]

Oh I get your point, but there's a difference between spouting fascist or reactionary rhetoric (which I don't deny that he has done, hence why I said that he appeared to be an exaggerated version of Trump) and actually being a fascist once in power.

The fairly nutty left-winger George Galloway (of all people) seems to understand the difference.

To believe that you need to believe he's been "spouting" fascist rhetoric for 30 years as some sort of deep cover act in the hope that one day fascism would become popular again. He was deeply unpopular for most of his political career, it would have been much easier for him to tone it down and just play the religious right winger but he continually persisted with his fascist brand.

I guess we'll have to disagree, I think there's enormous damage that a fascist President, not only without any respect for the norms of democracy which are largely observed as a form of civics, but actively looking to undermine it. The world is at a very difficult moment on climate change negotiations and Brazil has always played a huge role in climate change negotiations. Bolsonaro has an approach to the Amazon that goes beyond economic rationalism or climate denial. He seems almost vengeful like he wants to punish the minorities associated with the Amazon who recieve a lot of NGO support vis the Brazilian government and international organisations trying to hold back the tide of illegal logging and clearing.

 

[DaRick]

To believe that you need to believe he's been "spouting" fascist rhetoric for 30 years as some sort of deep cover act in the hope that one day fascism would become popular again. He was deeply unpopular for most of his political career, it would have been much easier for him to tone it down and just play the religious right winger but he continually persisted with his fascist brand.

I guess we'll have to disagree, I think there's enormous damage that a fascist President, not only without any respect for the norms of democracy which are largely observed as a form of civics, but actively looking to undermine it. The world is at a very difficult moment on climate change negotiations and Brazil has always played a huge role in climate change negotiations. Bolsonaro has an approach to the Amazon that goes beyond economic rationalism or climate denial. He seems almost vengeful like he wants to punish the minorities associated with the Amazon who recieve a lot of NGO support vis the Brazilian government and international organisations trying to hold back the tide of illegal logging and clearing.

I honestly don't think that we have a disagreement regarding what damage a genuinely fascist President could do in Brazil. Nor am I denying that Bolsonaro could be that guy (I certainly wouldn't have voted for him).

The only point of difference we have is that you appear more certain than I that he will behave like that once faced with the realities of governing a regional power. You could well be right, but we'll see.

 

[its free real estate]

I know the moronic left have denuded the term fascist by calling everything that they don’t like “fascist”, but if you have wait until a fascist does fascist things before you can call them that, then you’re basically sitting idle until the death camps get built.

 

[AM]

Fascism in any era is amorphous, but in the age of fake news, the denial of evidence – of rational debate – is easier than ever. Bolsonaro has managed to turn himself into a Rorschach ink test: each voter can pick out the element of his bigotry and violence that appeal to them, and ignore the parts where he attacks their own group. It’s a kind of intersectionality in reverse, where the oppressed turn on the oppressed, then team up together to elect a reactionary defender of the country’s business and military elites.

OVERLAND

 

[smokingjacket]

I honestly don't think that we have a disagreement regarding what damage a genuinely fascist President could do in Brazil. Nor am I denying that Bolsonaro could be that guy (I certainly wouldn't have voted for him).

The only point of difference we have is that you appear more certain than I that he will behave like that once faced with the realities of governing a regional power. You could well be right, but we'll see.

What major institutions could stop him? The army is right wing, the courts are stuffed with reactionaries as a legacy of the dictatorship. He's been handed a democratic mandate for violence against his enemies. Even if you take the most optimistic view that he doesn't start disappearing and shooting people, Bolsonaro could kill more of his enemies without firing a shot just using economics.

Brazil has extremely regionalised wealth distributions and economic inequality but it was much worse before the Workers Party came to power in 2002. Even though Brazil had developed characteristics in the urban areas and Southern regions, over 22 million people still lived on less than $2US a day which is the cutoff of extreme poverty where any sort of external shock basically puts you and your family at risk of death if you're the primary bread winner.

Economic gains, welfare and associated life expectancy improvements aren't permanent and can be reversed, as indicated by the millions of people who died early when the Soviet state collapsed in the 90's and was replaced by a Russian government pursuing Chicago style economic reform. Bolsonaro has appointed a Chicago economist named Paulo Guedes to a new economic super ministry, whose last public policy job was working with the rest of the Chicago School advisors for the fascist Chilean general Augusto Pinochet. Make of that what you will. Most of these economic advisors get giddy about working under these conditions because they get to implement deeply unpopular policies from their theory textbooks without the pressure of consequence. Bolsonaro and Guedes have already targeted pensions and the welfare transfers to the poor brought in by the Workers Party that lifted so many people out of extreme poverty so we'll see what happens.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...inister-shoulders-weight-of-bolsonaro-economy

 

[Todman]

Bolsonaro has appointed a Chicago economist named Paulo Guedes to a new economic super ministry, whose last public policy job was working with the rest of the Chicago School advisors for the fascist Chilean general Augusto Pinochet. Make of that what you will.

 

[smokingjacket]

The exact same policies saw the Russian economy halve in value and millions of people die.

Also while the economic reforms created economic growth, economic growth, unemployment and wages are by no means related.

Even under growth conditions in Chile, average people saw their incomes fall by over 20%. It's estimated about 83% of the gains from growth in the Pinochet period accrued to the top 10% of earners.

Brazil's economy has a much higher group of people who have only recently moved out of extreme poverty than Chile and doesn't have the same ability to absorb income shocks. Even assuming a best case scenario where the economy responds well to shock therapy and doesn't collapse from demand changes like Russia (nearly happened in 1982 Chilean financial crisis where GDP dropped by over 20% but they were bailed out by pro-Pinochet US institutions as part of the Cold War), the Chilean example shows major income losses from structural changes to the economy and ending redistribution programs as proposed by Bolsonaro and Guedes are an inevitable, maybe even desired effect of this style of development by oligopolist capital accumulation. If the exact same economic conditions as occurred in Pinochet Chile occur in Brazil, millions of people will fall back into subsistence poverty and lose their access to health and education which are based on redistributive cash-transfers from the government and poverty is far more deadly than weapons.

Your own graph shows that Pinochet's policies had mixed success and the real boom in GDP came when he was ousted in 1988 and the Aylwin government came in with a neo-Keynesian high growth-high government spending-high redistribution policy agenda with the goal of reducing income inequality for the bottom half of Chileans who were poorer than they were at the start of Pinochet's rule.

 

[smokingjacket]

Brazil cabinet process is going well. I see the new Brazilian Foreign Minister is at the intellectual level of one of our resident BigFooty loons.
Economic globalization piloted by cultural Marxism is destroying Christianity...I mean at this stage, * it, why not? Who cares anymore if things are meant to make sense.

 

[smokingjacket]

Already getting the feeling that the big lesson from the Brazilian experience in Latin-democratic fascism will be: there are things the US can do, and things that everyone else can do.

MERCOSUR and the EU were hoping to sign a comprehensive regional FTA and Macron has knocked it back due to Bolsonaro's climate change position.

Brazil reneges on hosting UN climate talks under Bolsonaro presidency
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...g-un-climate-talks-under-bolsonaro-presidency
Macron warns EU-Mercosur deal hangs on Bolsonaro
https://www.ft.com/content/da19561c-f41f-11e8-9623-d7f9881e729f

Also Bolsonaro ran on a rabidly anti-communist platform and very anti-Chinese engagement, who're a huge market for Brazil in agriculture and minerals. They'll need to find new markets for those exports if they plan on being part of an ideological anti-communist campaign.

 

[its free real estate]

At least Jair Bolsanaro has a name you can sing to the tune of Guantanemera