Editorial do The New York Times sobre a AL
Vejam abaixo o editorial do The New York Times sobre a esquerda latino-americana.
Abraços!
What’s Left of the Latin Left
Published: July 31, 2006
Ever since Hugo Chávez won Venezuela’s presidency and began presenting himself as a regional leader, the Bush administration has been proclaiming that he would push Latin America back to the left. But the left has been losing ground in recent elections, and there are signs that just being associated in voters’ minds with Mr. Chávez is a liability.
For a time, Mr. Chávez’s influence seemed powerful. In 2002, Ecuador elected Lucio Gutiérrez, another military populist, but later deposed him over an unconstitutional power grab. President Evo Morales of Bolivia is a radical populist who leans heavily on Mr. Chávez for advice, oil and money.
But in Peru, Alan García defeated Ollanta Humala, a self-proclaimed Chávez acolyte and particularly frightening demagogue, after framing the choice as “Chávez or Peru.” The Mexican election is still being contested, but there is little doubt it got so close after Felipe Calderón unfairly accused his opponent Andrés Manuel López Obrador of being an aspiring Chávez.
In Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Costa Rica and other countries where the presidents are moderate social democrats, they have more in common with their center-right than with Mr. Chávez.
This is hardly what the left used to be in Latin America. In fact, Latin America has never been more centrist and pragmatic. The only voters who have chosen radicals live in perpetually ill-governed nations where the mainstream has failed them.
The Bush administration, whose clumsy opposition to Mr. Chávez played into his hands, has learned from its mistakes. It has handled Bolivia carefully and enjoys good relations with most of the moderate leaders.
One reason for Mr. Chávez’s failure to ignite a leftist revolution may be that his prominence has little to do with his policies. The high price of oil allows him to spend freely at home and to buy gratitude abroad by selling oil cheaply and on credit.
His very personal defiance of President Bush is his other attraction. That draws a stream of ideological tourists to Caracas. But as Jorge Castañeda, Mexico’s former foreign minister, points out, if they really wanted to support someone helping the poor, they would go to Chile.
For a time, Mr. Chávez’s influence seemed powerful. In 2002, Ecuador elected Lucio Gutiérrez, another military populist, but later deposed him over an unconstitutional power grab. President Evo Morales of Bolivia is a radical populist who leans heavily on Mr. Chávez for advice, oil and money.
But in Peru, Alan García defeated Ollanta Humala, a self-proclaimed Chávez acolyte and particularly frightening demagogue, after framing the choice as “Chávez or Peru.” The Mexican election is still being contested, but there is little doubt it got so close after Felipe Calderón unfairly accused his opponent Andrés Manuel López Obrador of being an aspiring Chávez.
In Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Costa Rica and other countries where the presidents are moderate social democrats, they have more in common with their center-right than with Mr. Chávez.
This is hardly what the left used to be in Latin America. In fact, Latin America has never been more centrist and pragmatic. The only voters who have chosen radicals live in perpetually ill-governed nations where the mainstream has failed them.
The Bush administration, whose clumsy opposition to Mr. Chávez played into his hands, has learned from its mistakes. It has handled Bolivia carefully and enjoys good relations with most of the moderate leaders.
One reason for Mr. Chávez’s failure to ignite a leftist revolution may be that his prominence has little to do with his policies. The high price of oil allows him to spend freely at home and to buy gratitude abroad by selling oil cheaply and on credit.
His very personal defiance of President Bush is his other attraction. That draws a stream of ideological tourists to Caracas. But as Jorge Castañeda, Mexico’s former foreign minister, points out, if they really wanted to support someone helping the poor, they would go to Chile.
postado por Rickson Rios às
2:30 PM
0 Comentários
