[progchat_action] Viva Lula
 
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 09:15:43 -0600 (CST)


Viva Lula

Brazil's popular president is emerging as the most credible leader of the
Latin American left. Can he justify that faith?

Conor Foley
Guardian
February 20, 2008

As Fidel Castro contemplates his retirement and Hugo Chavez licks his wounds
after his first referendum defeat, Brazil's President Lula continues to
float effortlessly above his domestic political opponents to emerge as the
most credible leader of the Latin American left.

A recent opinion poll gave him almost 70% approval while more than half of
all Brazilians regarded his government positively. The poll conforms to a
broad trend of surveys since his election five years ago. His approval
rating has never dropped below 46% and throughout his period of office
Brazilians have consistently stated that they had a positive rather than
negative opinion of his government.

At first sight these findings seem strange. Brazil's economic growth has
been mediocre over the last five years, much lower than that of its
neighbour, and rival, Argentina. Lula's government has also been badly hit
by allegations of corruption and is seen to have mismanaged several crises,
such as an outbreak of yellow fever and a series of disasters that have
gripped its domestic airlines. The government has pursued an orthodox
macro-economic strategy, which has disappointed many of its supporters, and
its attempts at agrarian reform have been far too timid.

Brazil has been helped by the high world prices for many of its commodities
and the surge in demand for biofuels, of which it is the global leader.
Fiscal responsibility has kept inflation low and allowed the country to pay
back much of its international debt. The Brazilian stockmarket barely
noticed the credit crunch that has shaken the rest of the world. Low
inflation has also preserved the value of Lula's social programmes which
have brought tangible benefits to millions of poor Brazilians. Although
Brazil remains the most unequal country in the world, the gap between rich
and poor has narrowed under Lula's government, bucking the trend of most
other countries.

Another key to Lula's popularity might be the attitude of his political
opponents. As the first ordinary Brazilian to reach its highest political
office, Lula's election shocked the country's elites. Magazines such as
Veja, the bible of the Brazilian middle class, have poured a constant bile
of invective on Lula's government. He is repeatedly, and spuriously, linked
to Castro, Chavez and Colombia's Farc guerrillas, and accused of seeking to
subvert the Brazilian state. His working-class accent is frequently mocked
and his opponents "joke" that he cannot be trusted to run the country
because he once lost a finger in an industrial accident.

The scare stories and vitriol go far beyond what would be recognised as
normal boundaries of political debate and reflect a deep sense of insecurity
among many rich Brazilians.

It is often difficult to describe how the inequality of Brazilian society
touches every aspect of its day-to-day life. The Brazilian elite are super
wealthy, installing lifts in their private houses and hiring helicopters for
their children's birthday parties. Swimming pools and domestic servants come
as standard in most middle-class houses and apartments. Meanwhile the
favelas lack electricity, basic sanitation and even asphalt on the roads.

A couple of days ago I wrote on Cif about the latest Brazilian film to
depict the war taking place between police and trafficantes in Rio de
Janeiro's favelas, which provoked a large and vociferous response, both
directly to the article and in Brazil's blogosphere. Some Brazilians
objected to my personal view of the film, which is fair enough, while others
questioned my right as a foreigner to criticise their country. "To say that
social unequality is at the root of violence in Brazil is coffee-table
talk," opined one, while another stated that "This 'article' is clearly
written by someone who believes in human rights for drug dealers".

I like Brazil, which has a friendly, tolerant and multiracial society. But
it does not take long to notice that its middle class are predominantly
white, while its lower class are black and indigenous. Inequality here is
greater than it was under apartheid in South Africa, corruption worse than
the Balkans and levels of violence higher than most of the war zones in
which I have worked. One commenter noted that the police commander of one of
the worst prison massacres in Brazilian history was repeatedly elected to a
local parliament, while others expressed shame at the casual attitude of
some of their friends to police torture and murder.

Brazil's transition to a political democracy was relatively smooth, but the
power structures and attitudes that it inherited from the dictatorship are
still deeply entrenched. I can understand a certain defensiveness when these
are challenged, particularly by outsiders, but well-meaning foreigners
should not withhold criticisms out of a misplaced sense of solidarity or
romanticism. It is patronising to plead "mitigating circumstances" for an
intolerance of dissent.

The scale of the challenge confronting Lula is still immense. He has made
some mistakes, for which he should be criticised, but he has avoided the one
made by other Latin American leftists who see social and economic rights as
being in some way counter-posed to civil and political ones. Social
democracy means pursuing the two goals goals together and Lula's recognition
of this has been his greatest achievement.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/conor_foley/2008/02/viva_lula.html

This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from
http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm