The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Category: Latin and South America

What Jair Bolsonaro’s Unfortunate Brazilian Victory Means

As you may have heard, Jair Bolsonaro has won election in Brazil.

Here are some direct quotes:

“I am in favor of a dictatorship, a regime of exception.”

“The pau-de-arara [a torture technique] works. I’m in favor of torture, you know that. And the people are in favor as well.”

“Through the vote you will not change anything in this country, nothing, absolutely nothing! It will only change, unfortunately, when, one day, we start a civil war here and do the work that the military regime did not do. Killing some 30,000, starting with FHC [then-president Fernando Henrique Cardoso], not kicking them out, killing! If some innocent people are going to die, fine, in any war innocents die.”

“I would not employ [a woman] with the same salary [of a man]. But there are many women who are competent.”

“I’ll give carte blanche for the police to kill.”

‘We are going to gun down all these Workers Party supporters,’ [Bolsonaro] shouted at a later rally, using a tripod to mimic shooting a rifle….

In addition Bolsanaro has:

  • Promised to cut down the Amazon jungle (source of 20 percent of the world’s oxygen) as fast as possible
  • To destroy the remaining indigenous tribes of the Amazon
  • To either send left-wingers into exile or to jail them

Evangelicals, as a group, remain a putrescent abscess wherever they are.

Perhaps even more decisive was the backing Bolsonaro enjoyed among evangelical voters, who account for up to a quarter of the electorate. They proved to be a soft target for the “fake news” spread by his social media campaign, most notably the preposterous claim that Haddad planned to distribute “gay kits” in primary schools instructing teachers to encourage homosexuality.

Jair Bolsonaro

I will remind readers that there was a legislative coup that threw out the left-wing President for corruption (the idea that she was more corrupt than most of the people voting to get rid of her is hilarious). Then the most popular politician in Brazil, Lula, was sent to prison (again, ostensibly on corruption charges) and not allowed to run.

In other words, first the field was cleared of politicians who were almost certainly less corrupt than most Brazilian politicians (and almost certainly no more corrupt), then the right-wing brought in the most extreme politician possible. That politician will now purge the left, in an attempt to ensure right-wing rule for at least a generation, and probably two. (The same thing is currently happening in Argentina.)

The best parallel for Bolsanoro is probably the Phillipines’ Duterte. Lots of extra-judicial murder, lots of corruption for the “right” people, lots of boot in the face for the “wrong” people.

For those outside Brazil, the main issue is the Amazon. If its destruction is significantly sped up (and I see no reason to doubt that it will be), it will make our environmental problems much, much worse.

I’m not a believer, generally speaking, of interfering in other nations’ internal business–and that includes sanctions. But I would support a carrot-and-stick approach with regards to the Amazon: Stop cutting it down and be rewarded (with cold hard cash if necessary); Cut it down, and be brutally cut off from the outside world.

This is because such environmental issues are not just internal political matters.

Finally, I will note that much of what is happening in South America can be explained most simply as “the left was in charge when commodity prices were high, and when they dropped, and economies suffered, the left was blamed.”

That is not all that is happening, of course, but without this, neither Bolsonaro and other similar would-be, bloody-handed authoritarians, nor those who cleared the way for him, like Brazil’s right-wing judges, would have had the social sanction to act.

Those who would run left-wing governments cannot tie their economy’s health to the fickleness of commodity markets. Commodity prices are cyclical and always have been.

It can also be laid at Dilma, being the sort of technocrat left-wing moron who accepted IMF advice and engaged in austerity. The IMF is not your friend if you are left-wing. Ever. Do not accept their advice. (It’s not quite never good, but it’s over 90 percent bad. Bet the odds.)

Bolsonaro will be a disaster for Brazil and a disaster for the world. That is not to say that some Brazilians will not do well under him, some will. Most of those who voted for him, will, however, find that it was not a good, longer-term bet.

(Aside: Merkel has stood down as leader of her party. She was a terrible person, who did great evil (something her cheerleaders constantly elide). She’s still Chancellor, but her days are now numbered. Sadly, Germany will probably replace her with someone worse.)

Update: This is an excellent summary of the history that led to Bolsonaro’s election.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

The Destruction of Latin America’s Left and Lessons for Everyone

I’ve wanted to write about this for a while, and this is a good place to start:

The so-called marea rosa, or ‘pink tide’, of allied leftist governments which held sway across Latin America in previous years is being rolled back. Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff was removed from power in a right-wing coup, co-conspirators of which have now managed to imprison the current presidential frontrunner, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Ecuador’s Lenin Moreno has stabbed his former leader Rafael Correa in the back by barring him from seeking re-election, while seemingly purging his cabinet of remaining Correa loyalists and beginning the process of allowing the US military back into the country.

Meanwhile in Argentina, the former President is also under criminal investigation.

This all seems, well, “they did bad things, they should be prosecuted,” but somehow other politicians, often clearly more corrupt, aren’t prosecuted. The prosecution of Lula, in particular, was clearly a way to stay in power, since all polls show he would have won the election.

The norms are breaking down in many nations, including the United States. What is done to win is illegitimate, as with Republican vote manipulation and the 2000 Supreme court decision; what is done afterwards to opponents is also often illegitimate, and if the wrong person wins, they are gone after legally.

Americans will immediately think of the efforts to get Trump, and some will assume it is in the same vein. To some extent it seems to be, in others it isn’t (again, he’s clearly in violation of Emoluments.) But it didn’t start with Trump, it started with Clinton, who had clearly done nothing that affected him as President. (That said, he and Newt Gingrich had an agreement in place to gut Social Security and Medicare, which impeachment sidetracked, so I’m not crying too much. Clinton was a right-winger in every important way.)

Corruption is bad, and should be purged, but when I see corruption investigations which are clearly aimed at one side and not both (as with Xi’s anti-corruption drive in China, which was overall good but somehow took out the other major power blocs in China) I suspect that it isn’t primarily about corruption.

And in Brazil, where most seem to agree that those attacking Dilma were, in fact, more corrupt than her, it’s more than hmmm.

This is an ugly game. In Latin America it is bi-partisan with respect to the US. Having Latin America be left-wing was something neither Democrats nor Republicans wanted.

Meanwhile Argentina is inking an agreement with the IMF for 50 billion in exchange for structural adjustments and the Ecuadoran President is clearly moving towards forcing Assange out of Ecuador’s London embassy. (Yes, yes, you may hate Assange for a variety of reasons, some legitimate, but he is not being targeted because he is not a nice man, but because both Democrats and Republicans, on record, want to punish him various leaks, especially Collateral Murder.)

This is a very dirty game, and left-wingers keep treating it as if it is not; as if there are rules, and both sides play by them. Increasingly, in the US that is not the case, and it is clearly not the case many other places. If your enemies win, they will destroy you by any means. You should think long and hard about what you will do to them if you get into power, because they know what they will do to you.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Brazil’s Economic Tumble

No surprise, but…

Brazil’s economy has fallen further into its worst ever recession, contracting by 3.6 percent in 2016…

…Brazil’s economy is now eight percent smaller than it was in December 2014.

Recently, there was a legislative coup in Brazil, but that was a symptom, not a cause, as are Venezuela’s problems, the electoral reversal in Argentina, and so on.

All that is required to understand what is happening is this chart of commodity prices.

 Bloomberg 5 years commodity index March 8 2017


Bloomberg 5 years commodity index March 8 2017

We have a very foolish economy. The developed world has been in austerity since 2008, China does not have a rich enough middle class to take up demand. Without demand for goods and services in the developed world, commodity prices have crashed.

Our lords and masters don’t want growth they can’t capture, and they value low wages and debt-slavery more than they do a thriving economy. As a result, the economies which prospered by supplying commodities to China and other manufacturers have stumbled and crashed out. This simple fact is behind many headlines which seem unrelated to it, including virtually every change of government in South America.

A globalized economy is moronic. It makes countries dependent on policies over which they have no control. There is virtually nothing that Brazil’s government can do about this (though engaging in austerity of their own is stupid); nor was there a damn thing Venezuela could do about it (though, yes, the Bolivarian economy was mismanaged, something I said as far back as 2004).

This is by design. Our elites don’t want national elites to be able to make policy. As a result, there are only two nations which approach full sovereignty in the world: the United States and China. Only they are powerful enough and rich enough to make unilateral moves without suffering vast consequences (and maybe not even them). The EU could almost be sovereign, if it wasn’t run by ideological morons, but it isn’t, and Russia has enough resources and military power to have some sovereignty, and that’s basically it.

And so, the Brazilians will suffer what they must, because however large and rich they think they are, they are still a non-sovereign state in the ways that matter in our world.


The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

Castro’s Legacy

Castro has died at age 90.

Despite the squeals, the bottom line for Castro is that he improved the lives for the vast majority of Cubans. Even after Soviet aid was cut off, Cuba under Castro was able to recover. Cuba, like all nations, suppresses some political dissent, but it has a far smaller percentage of people imprisoned than the US, and those prisoners are treated far better than US prisoners. Human welfare statistics are high, including lifespan, infant mortality, education, and so on.

One can qualify Cuba’s success, but it is, overall, a success–especially when compared to most Latin and South American countries.

As for Castro himself, he outlived pretty much all his enemies and many of their children, and died in bed. Can’t ask for much more than that as a revolutionary leader.


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

The Brazilian Dilma Rousseff Coup

Dilma Roussef

Dilma Roussef

Rousseff has been impeached and removed, supposedly for corruption, though there’s little evidence she personally benefited from corruption, while many of those who impeached her are very corrupt. Brazil was a “miracle economy” for much of the past decade and a half while the “left” ran things, but much of that was due to forces beyond local control, like the price of oil and the strength of the world and Chinese economies.

The new President’s “plan” is as follows:

President Michel Temer said on Wednesday that fixing Brazil’s economy would not be easy, but his priority was to pass a spending cap this year, attract foreign investment, reduce unemployment, and begin pension system reform.

A.K.A., neoliberal austerity. Unions will be crushed, pensions will be cut, spending will be cut, and outsiders will be allowed to buy up Brazilian companies and resources for relatively cheap, so long as Brazilian elites get a cut.

Rousseff wasn’t the greatest prize, having run neoliberal-light policies in many areas, but she wasn’t personally corrupt and she engaged in far less austerity than Temer will.

Parties of the left are being crushed in much of South America for the simple reason that they ran the countries during the resource boom of the 2000s and have not been able to manage the drop in resource prices, first from oil, then generally as China stopped buying so many resources. I’ve discussed the perils of basing a left-wing government on resources before.

(See also Mandos on the coup.)


If you enjoyed this article, and want me to write more, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.

What the Melian Dialogue tells us about the End of Empire (Venezuelan security threat edition)

The Course of Empire by Thomas Cole

The Course of Empire by Thomas Cole

I’ll just point out that in no way can Venezuela be considered a security threat to the United States.  And the “human rights violations”, while some are real are far less than routinely committed by many US allies, including Saudi Arabia, while Venezuela is more democratic, again, than many countries the US has not imposed sanctions on.

This sort of bullying is exactly the sort of thing which will lead to the end of American hegemony.  Though less severe, one is reminded of the Melian dialogue.  The Athenians argue that the powerful do as they will and the weak as they must, and that the Melians should surrender.  If they do not, the Athenians will slaughter the men and sell the women and children into slavery.

The Melian reply in part, is thus:

But do you not recognise another danger? For, once more, since you drive us from the plea of justice and press upon us your doctrine of expediency, we must show you what is for our interest, and, if it be for yours also, may hope to convince you: Will you not be making enemies of all who are now neutrals? When they see how you are treating us they will expect you some day to turn against them; and if so, are you not strengthening the enemies whom you already have, and bringing upon you others who, if they could help, would never dream of being your enemies at all?


(I am fundraising to determine how much I’ll write this year.  If you value my writing, and want more of it, please consider donating.)


The irony of the Melian dialogue is that both sides are right: the Melians are destroyed, and would have been better off if they submitted.  But the destruction of Melos is indeed one of the contributing factors to the eventual fall of Athens, because while Sparta may be nastier internally, they are also less dangerous to other city-states than Athens is.

The analogy is not perfect, because even with all of Venezuela’s problems, much of the population is better off resisting the US than it would be conceding (the poor and the darker colored citizens have benefited immensely under the Bolivaran revolution).

But America, and the West’s continued insistence that nations will kneel or suffer is very similar and is already damaging American power.

Page 2 of 2

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén