WHEN Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was diagnosed with cancer of the larynx late last year, the presumption was that he would have to cut down on the politicking, at least for a while. And indeed radiotherapy and chemotherapy weakened Brazil's ex-president, and took away his voice—giving his handpicked successor, Dilma Rousseff, a useful chance to build an independent identity. But since he announced his recovery in March and returned to public engagements in April, Lula has picked up his old role as the power broker of the Workers' Party (PT)—not always with the happiest of results. And in recent days, for the first time, he has hinted that he may run once more for the presidency.
On May 31st Lula appeared on a television chat show with Fernando Haddad, previously the federal education secretary and now Lula's pick for the PT's candidate for São Paulo's mayoral elections in October. Opposition parties complained that the joint interview broke a ban on campaigning before the municipal election season starts on July 5th—although since Mr Haddad is technically only a “pre-candidate” (the party is expected to name him formally later this month), whether the rules were broken or not is moot.
What really made the headlines was that when asked if he would take another shot at the presidency, instead of deflecting the question as he always had before, Lula said he might. Ms Rousseff would be the natural candidate, he said—but he would be willing to run if she did not want to. (Brazil allows any number of presidential terms, as long as no three are consecutive, so they are both eligible.) “I'm not going to let some tucano [the Brazilian nickname for members of the opposition Party of Brazilian Social Democracy] be president of Brazil again,” he added.
Lula's backing for Mr Haddad is not popular with everyone in the PT. Marta Suplicy, a former mayor still very popular with poorer São Paulo residents, wanted to run as well. But Lula strong-armed her into stepping aside, because he regards her as incapable of attracting votes from the better-off. On June 2nd Ms Suplicy failed to turn up to a PT bash to publicise Mr Haddad's pre-candidacy, later blaming unspecified personal problems. That earned her a big black mark. Lula's plan relies on her campaigning her heart out for Mr Haddad, who at the moment gets a measly 3% spontaneous name recognition among the city's voters. It also sparked speculation that she might leave the party altogether.
Lula is also stirring things up in Brasília. The federal capital is currently paralysed by a far-reaching parliamentary committee of inquiry into the links between illegal gambling rings and politicians. In a recent interview with Veja, a weekly news magazine, Gilmar Mendes, one of the 11 members of the Supreme Court, claimed that Lula had threatened to entangle him in that investigation unless the judge found a way to delay until after October's elections the trial of the defendants in an older corruption saga: the so-called “mensalão”. This dates from Lula's first presidential term, from 2003 to 2006, when it is alleged that the PT bought the loyalty of its coalition partners in congress with monthly bribes (mensalão is a Portuguese neologism that translates roughly as “big monthly payment”).
Lula is not himself among the defendants in the mensalão. But some of his closest associates are, and the scandal remains the low point of his two presidential terms, as well as a potent weapon for his political opponents. Lula acknowledged that the meeting with Mr Mendes had taken place, but said Mr Mendes's claims about what was said at it were “untrue”. Until now there has never been any sign of strain between Ms Rousseff and her predecessor and mentor. But that may change unless Lula regains his legendarily sure political touch.



Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Aos excessivamente otimistas. Vocês me parecem boas pessoas mas o seu modelo mental foi moldado, de forma a acreditar também em fadas e doentes, pois acreditar no Enorme Avanço do Brasil na Era ( político fulano de tal, nem vou citar nomes)requer muito esforço para acreditar em mentiras ou em meias-verdades. FATO: O BRASIL ESTÁ APENAS LIGEIRAMENTE MELHOR em alguns aspectos, beneficiou-se enormemente de políticas econômicas adotadas ainda nos anos 1990, então, não é obra do político da ocasião ou da oposição apenas. Foi uma questão de erros e acertos em época certa.
E, beneficiou-se, de forma gigantesca, da conjuntura da economia internacional, antes da crise financeira internacional parecia estar funcionando muito bem, então o Brasil pôde exportar matérias primas, commodities agrícolas e bens sem qualquer tecnologia agregada, a preços relativamente altos pois a demanda era alta, até porque o Brasil até hoje não se deu ao trabalho de investir em tecnologia ou ao menos de copiar, ou, melhor dizendo, incorporar tecnologia ao importar equipamentos de fora ( alguns empresários bem orientado fazem isso, também, se não o fizerem perdem em competitividade, então não é mais questão de escolha, se tiver sucateado, acaba.)Não há interesse em fazer o que é certo, pois não beneficia os já tão beneficiados pela manutenção do STAUS QUO. E esses beneficiários NÃO SÃO SOMENTE AS ELITES herdeiras desde as capitanias hereditárias, voltando bastante no tempo até para ilustrar o exagero de muitos, e dos grandes especuladores financeiros ou de terras, na verdade, os beneficiários são todos aqueles que detém o poder. Não importa quem seja. POlíticos, burgueses capitalistas de dentro ou de fora do país, lobbies, etc... POdem até querer desenvolver o país, ter esse querer, mas, as suas atitudes não refletem isso, pois costumam sabotar os importantes projetos ao dilapidar os recursos que deveriam ser utilizados na transformação da sociedade e de suas estruturas. Há um enorme custo de oportunidade nisso, e o custo é a nossa própria existência com dignidade. Já qunto a mim: já estou de saco cheio do Brasil e de mentiras e otimismo mal embasado. ASsim que eu puder caio fora.
Olá guest,
Entendo e consigo respeitar seu ponto de vista. Mesmo.
Morei fora do Brasil por 17 anos, estudei, me formei e trabalhei em outros mercados a maior parte da minha vida, e algo que posso afirmar: o Brasil está MUITO melhor que muitos países de 1o. mundo.
Acho que as pessoas tem que viajar mesmo, ter essa experiência (se possível) de morar fora do Brasil por ALGUNS anos.
Quando voltamos à nossa pátria (após anos vivendo em outro ambiente, cultura, enfim...), temos outra visão sobre as coisas, sobre política, sobre nossos chefes de Estado (seja quem for), sobre cidadania, enfim... são pontos de vista e vivências que não encontramos em qualquer livro, infelizmente.
Espero que consiga "cair fora" como disse, isso seria maravilhoso p/ que percebesse que "as mentiras e otimismo mal embasado", é também uma realidade de muitos países de 1o. mundo, a grande maioria eu diria. :(
Boa sorte em suas metas!
O Brasil está melhor sim, mas, há certo exagero quanto a essa melhora, depende do período considerado. EU disse ligeiramente melhor, talvez esteja bem melhor, depende do ponto de vista, dos beneficiários do sistema, enfim. Os avanços ocorrem desde os tempos de Collor,por incrível que pareca, ele não somente abriu as portas de nossa economia protecionista à concorrência externa,o que era preciso, mas, o seu erro foi arrombar as portas e quebrar vários empresários nacionais que não tiveram tempo de adaptação com a enxurrada de produtos importados baratos,ou mais competitivos, forçando as empresas nacionais sobreviventes a produzirem produtos melhores. E teve também o outro lado, o mais feio. O sujeito fez o que fez, sofreu impeachement legítimo e hoje é senador da república, imagine só! QUanto aos avanços, ocorreram também e é importante mencionar, com os ex-mandatários Itamar Franco e FHC, passando por Lula (que foi sim um bom presidente, teve suas falhas, mas quem não tem?) O que houve de certo dessa vez? A tão óbvia e sonhada continuidade de serviços públicos, com as suas devidas ampliações e melhorias. Então, o crédito são de todos esses ex-presidentes e não do partido de direita, centro ou esquerda, como afirmam alguns fanáticos da política. E Agora a Dilma, prefiro ela do que o mentiroso dissimulado da oposição,aliás, foi vergonhosa a corrida à presidência com a imprensa tomando partido e com os presidenciáveis atacando uns aos outros e implorando nossos votos de forma patética. Isso acontece com os Américas tbm. Voltando às melhorias, acho que ainda é cedo para declarar o grande triunfo, ainda há muito o que fazer, ainda podemos retroceder se os sabotadorezinhos da nação já bastante empoderados tiverem sempre sucesso em sua saga de saques ao erário, negligenciando o andamento e execução de importantes projetos. Precisamos das reformas e de moralização na política tbm. Eu gostaria de pensar nos avanços brasileiros, mas, enquanto pagar-mos os impostos mais pesados do mundo e não tivermos uma contra-partida razoável em serviços públicos,(até porque, o governo tem total poder discricionário nestes casos, os impostos não implicam em contra-partida para áreas determinadas, quem determina tudo é o governo, quanto às taxas a contra-partida é obrigatória ou vinculada, vide Constituíção Federal) ou, mesmo alcançando a tão sonhada auto-suficiência em petróleo como o governo anuncia aos 4 ventos, ainda assim, pagaremos pesados tributos para o uso dos derivados do ouro negro e para o lucro das distribuidores e donos das redes de postos de gasolina (geralmente cartéis). Para você ver, até hoje, em Brasília, não há postos de gasolina em estacionamentos de shopping centers ou de supermercados, com o falacioso pretexto de que isso seria prejudicial à segurança da população. Não obstante, é fácil constatar a presença de postos a poucos metros de residências no plano piloto, área nobre, Brasília propriamente dita. Espero mesmo que o Brasil melhore, não torço contra. Agora, se houver entraves demais à livre concorrência, quem perde? A população. É só um exemplo de algo a nosso desfavor e desserviço que a burocracia e os lobbies impõe, dentre os milhares disponíveis. Agradeço a sua educada postura e resposta! Ah, por fim, eu sei que do lado de lá há muita coisa maquiada...Viva o Brasil e os brasieiros honrados!!!
Legal, obrigada pelas palavras e saiba que a reciproca é verdadeira! Sempre bom debater com pessoas inteligentes!
Concordo com vc em diversos pontos, e infelizmente nosso Brasil ainda tem um longo caminho a ser percorrido.
Também fico abismada com a falta de cidadania de nossos patrícios, que reclamam tanto da situação da nossa terrinha, mas ainda não perceberam que os problemas começam justamente com a falta de consciência na hora do voto.
A grande verdade é que o Brasil todavia é uma imensa colônia (veja nosso juiz do TSE, o não tão dígno Sr. Mendes... imagine o que esse sujeito já não fez? E ainda existem pessoas que o consideram digno...urgh!)
O Brasil precisa redesenhar nossa constituição, e investir na educação. Caso contrário, de que adianta ser a 6a. maior economia do mundo?
Algumas coisas são surreais, veja a tal proposta p/ acabar com o teto do salário dos senadores... volta dos marajás? Cruzes!
Concordo que ainda é MUITO cedo p/ declarar triunfo, como vc disse "ainda há muito o que fazer, ainda podemos retroceder se os sabotadorezinhos da nação já bastante empoderados tiverem sempre sucesso em sua saga de saques ao erário, negligenciando o andamento e execução de importantes projetos." - Imediatamente pensei em Belo Monte. Mesmo essa construção sendo fundamental p/ o crescimento do nosso país, alguns milhÕes de brasileiros continuam consumindo as babozeiras que a mídia propaga, sem o menor cuidado em verificar a veracidade dessas informações.
Realmente muito triste, mas ainda existem as boas pessoas, as informadas (ou que buscam informar-se), p/ continuar brigando por mudanças, enquanto a grande maioria continua dormindo...
Isso aí! Viva o Brasil e os brasileiros honrados!
Prazada Fabiana, não se engane, os marajás jamais saíram do contexto, mas apenas o apelido caiu em desuso depois da ERA COLLOR. Acesse o site do Correio Braziliense de hoje, tem médico da rede pública ganhando 70 mil reais por mês, sendo que o teto, o máximo, do subsídio de membro de poder é o de ministro do STF que está em torno de 26 mil e alguma coisa. Tem gente argumentando no fórum de debates que há técnicos,analistas e outros trabalhadores do serviço auxiliar do Judiciário ganhando mais de 100 mil reais por mês em Brasília! Link para consulta: http://www.correiobraziliense.com.br/app/noticia/cidades/2012/07/04/inte...
TUdo bem que os ministros ganhem bem, o esforço intelectual deles é hercúleo e a responsabilidade igualmente, mas, e quanto aos servidores auxiliares, se ganham salários astronômicos mesmo, Meu Deus! daí o poder público torna-se um fim em si mesmo e perde totalmente o foco de servir aos contribuintes e à nação. Não vou entrar no mérito de membros de poder e do que fazem pois não tenho conhecimento suficiente dos casos em questão. Quanto à usina, concordo plenamente com você, em gênero e número. Na época do apagão fiquei até doente por comer alimentos estragados devido à falta de energia para a refrigeração e conservação. A economia perdeu, a sociedade perdeu e recentemente atores GLOBAIS se insurgiram contra a construção da usina de Belo Monte, prestando um desserviço à nossa soberania. Acho que o que dizem sobre a grande mídia e sua origem é a verdade, sobre a insurgência estrangeira em nossa terra brasilis. Abraço!
For those who tries to promote communism in Brazil: go read Orwell!
All socialists and communists of this world are for: dictatorship and lies. And what is to be expected from people living in socialists countries? I answer this one: They are expected to be automatons,humans acting like machines,producing for the "regime", applauded by the "camarade" and do not dare to question the leaders, better read:the "pigs" decisions.
No free press, no freedom to ask. All liberty is suppressed. A sad truth after the "revolution", or, better saying massacre, blood bath and chaos. AS a matter of fact, there´s some groups trying to promote a silent revolution in Brazil and i hope they always fail and fall.
And, the internationalism is the biggest fallacy of this world. It assumes that, for example, the amazon is not brazilian but belongs to the rest of the world. Internationalism is the death of sovereignty.
True story.
Communism or socialism, are great ideas (ideals?), but unfortunaly absolutely impossible. Total utopia.
When I went to high school in the US, I remember I had a huge argument with a teacher as in our geography book the Amazon was considered "neutral" - meaning: world patrimony, therefore, it wasn't recognized as Brazilian territory.
Excuse-me? Not Brazilian territory?
It scared me a little bit, since te US has a long history of "help & invade" countries, just as they had done with the Middle East folks.
Ludacris stuff...
It would be perfect, maybe one day, so far from here and now. I am not all against it, i just do not believe it. The idea and ideals are great, are the best, but, not in this world, not now. Too many greedy people...
Exacly!
Hello Fabiana.
I've been reading all these posts until I get to this one.
I am a Brazilian born US citizen (came here when I was just 7 years old). I went to high school in Houston, Texas, the 4th biggest cities in the nation and one of the richest ones.
I can tell you I NEVER EVER SAW that book with the "neutral" amazon that you mentioned about.
I think you've had received that famous hoax, with a lot of grammar mistakes, which a leftist college professor released few years ago.
Even the New York Times, disdained and joked about that frenzy from that mischievous professor. You can check it on this link
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/23/weekinreview/ideas-trends-deep-in-braz...
Anyways, before you say things like that, you should write down, the book's name and its writer, to give some foundation on your words.
Keep it honest, please.
Please youtube the video LULA SCANDAL. These politicians in Brazil are for the most part CROOKS.
Enquanto,a presidente e seus correligionários gastam fortunas com inúmeros benefícios à parte mais pobres de certas regiões(não por gentilezas políticas,mais para criar currais eleitorais)as forças armadas do BRASIL,passa por imensa miséria,tanto seus componentes,como o reaparelhamento,o revanchismo é claro,mais a maioria do pessoal das forças armadas,não participaram do período da chamada ditadura que já se vão mais de 25 anos e não tem cabimento esse revanchismo.Gostaria que um jornal de fora soubesse,pois a imprensa está censurada.
Lula behaves, always did, like a superior human being. He is arrogant and do things good politicians (like he "think" and claim he is) are not supposed to do. Lula (and Dilma but at a much lesser degree) represents the epitome of a grave sickness in a leader, the final condition of it.
He does things, like those reported, and simply doesn't care because he knows nothing will happen to him. He acts like he is a superior citizen. I still remember the absurd of he saying to a reporter in France that Sarney (the president of the house of senators [don't remember how calls it] at the time, and who was accused of many bad things) should not be treated like a normal citizen in Brazil. It was a big buzz here, but he never regreted that.
Well, there is a bible of absurds to say about Lula, but let me stop. I'm already feeling stressed only for talking about him.
I agree with Ricardo Batista. The Brazil is living a lie. Our institution are bankrupt. There are a corruption that destroys Brazil. Almost all in Brazil is make toward political groups of the government base. We don’t have good education, good health , nothing. I repeat: the Brazil is bankrupt.
All I can say is: put your money where your mouth is. Most people who have money and know what they're doing would bet against you happily.
The fact is, my friend, that the farse of the PT is becoming evident now. The economy isn’t growing, we are with stagnation in sight . Soon, we will being as an European country - In Matter of crisis.
Right. I bet you have been saying this for ten years now. Wait another ten, maybe you'll be correct. At present, there are no signs of the country going bankrupt, sorry. Just compare any data with any data in those countries you mention.
Absolutely.
despite the censorship going on here, I'd like to carry on showing who Lula really is. I love freedom of speech. leftists people and Lula don't. Lula is a gangster. all he does is for his own benefit and for the benefit of his political party, PT (goodfellas). they want to stay in power forever, they hate democracy and always did. Lula manipulates the brazilian lower class with his "carisma", he does same with the ignorant and uneducated people. also, Lula and PT are experts when it comes to making up numbers. a brilliant marketing technique. they make brazilian people think they are actually living better nowadays, but that's a lie. Brazilian cities are more dangerous, crime rates are higher, drug problems are increasing, the number of people living in slums is growing and growing fast. in Natal (capital of Rio Grande do Norte) for example, the number of people living in slums (favelas) from 2000 to 2011 grew 1234%, Florianópolis 643%, São Luis 550%, Macapá 543%, etc, etc. the numbers the government show on TV, news papers, magazines, etc don't macth reality. Lula is a liar. the truth is, Lula and PT din't do anything good to our country, nothing at all. Brazilian public schools are disgusting, hospitals are disgusting, motorways are bad, public transport is extremely bad, our ports and airports are bad and need investments, etc, etc, etc the country is mess but unfortunetely brazilian people are blind to see the reality and fight for better. Lula and PT are damaging our society very badly by manipulating our people with lies. I hope we can see some changes soon, otherwise our country will be in the hands of theses gangsters for a long long time.
There is a bit of a censorship going on here ! hahaha
two of messagens have been deleted ! why ??
well, let's get back to waht really matters. Let's talk about facts. Veja , Folha de São Paulo and other magazines or newspaper are hated by leftist brazilian politicians especially Lula because of this. check below :
the brazilian press is the one investigating and trying to clean up Brasilia:
JUNE 2011 - Antonio Palocci resigned over corruption allegations. Palocci was the Brazilian president's chief of staff:
"The scandal broke three weeks ago when the FOLHA DE SAO PAULO NEWSPAPER reported Mr Palocci's net worth was 20 times greater than it had been four years ago."
JULY 2011: Transport Mnister Alfredo Nascimento resigned
"Transport Minister Alfredo Nascimento resigned four days after two of his top aides quit, one was suspended, and one went on official vacation in the wake of an article in “VEJA” MAGAZINE that alleged irregularities in the granting of contracts."
AUGUST 2011 : Brazil's Agriculture Minister Wagner Rossi resigned amid a corruption scandal:
"He had been accused of accepting bribes and free air travel from agricultural companies, local media report. (CORREIO BRAZILIENSE)"
SEPTEMBER 2011: "Brazil’s tourism minister, Pedro Novais, resigned Wednesday after FOLHA DE SAO PAULO NEWSPAPER published new allegations that he misused public funds."
OCTOBER 2011: "Brazilian Sports Minister Orlando Silva has resigned after being accused of corruption. "
"Allegations against Mr Silva were first published in the influential MAGAZINE VEJA earlier this month."
DECEMBER 2011: "Brazil's Labour Minister, Carlos Lupi, has handed in his resignation to President Dilma Rousseff."
"He is the seventh minister to resign since President Rousseff took office in January. Six departed amid scandals over alleged corruption."
"The FOLHA DE SAO PAULO NEWSPAPER also reported that he was being investigated for allegedly receiving a salary as a federal congressional employee, while at the same time serving in, and receiving a salary from, the state legislature of Rio de Janeiro."
FEBRUARY 2012: "Mr Negromonte's resignation had been widely expected after Brazilian NEWSPAPER FOLHA DE SAO PAULO reported that his executive secretary had met with a businessman who was interested in bidding for a public works programme in Cuiaba, which the Cities Ministry was in charge of awarding"
This is going to be my last post for some time to come.
I hope Brazilians would read my comments and
seriously consider what is wrong with Brazil,
and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!
1)Everything in Brazil is politicized. That is one
thing that is holding Brazil back. In the U.S. and
Israel there is a chasm between Left and Right as
there is in Brazil. However, what is important for
those two countries go forwards regardless of which
party is in power. In Israel, Left and Right are
sometimes at each others throats, but core values
such as security, education, financial well being
are not thwarted because Kadima is in power or
Likud is in power. Likewise, Democrats and Republicans
filibuster each other to death. However, NASA budget,
U.S.Federal money for Highways (unlike Brazil's Transamazon
fiasco) is released in a timely manner. Even the collapsed
bridge in Minnesota did not linger in limbo. It was
quickly rebuilt in the midst of a global recession!
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/01/31/bridgeupdate/
Until Brazil sets its centuries old B.S. petty politics
aside and work together on infrastructure, education,
and quality of life issues, it will continue to be
the laughingstock of the developed world no matter how
many points it goes up on the global ranking.
2)Everyone decries corruption, but there is no grass root
movement (Orange Revolution, Arab Spring, etc) that attacks
those in high places with massive mail protesting it,
lobbying less corrupt or cleaner politicians to demand
laws that imprison with heavy jail sentences ALL politicians
and connected that violate the public with unfettered corruption.
Eveyone blah blah that Senator so and so did this or that.
Are you willing to organize a massive protest? Are you willing
to flood Brasilia with 10 million signatures, mails and e-mails
as well as protest on the streets? Until you are willing, nothing
will get done.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-18417137
3)Brazilians hate when foreigners, ex-pats, and even more
enlightened Brazilians point out serious flaws within Brazil.
When someone knows something is wrong, but gets irritated
instead of making corrections, what does that tell about the
person?
If most Brazilians would consistently say no to:
*Jeitinho
*Q.I. (Quem Indicou - Who recommended you?)
*Kowtowing to Dr. so and so and his gatekeepers
*Lei de Gerson
*Quebra galhos
Brazil would quickly become a serious country and
a true admired country in the developed and the developing
world. Other countries would see that it is possible
to do business without the "Custo Brasil" (Brazil Cost).
Brazil would be quite respected and investors would flock
in even in the midst of hard times.
4)Brazil history and institutions are severely flawed.
*The traditional middle class and the so called "Elites"
only cared about themselves. They have been stingy in a
land of plenty when it came to infrastructure, education
and investments, and quality of life issues. When Lula gave
a meager crumbs to the masses, and in the process improve their
lot a tiny bit, the so called "Elites" and upper classes
felt affronted, disrupted, and instigated to derail him.
Those who once were under foot behaved even worse than
the so called "Elites" by engendering the worse corruption
case in Brazilian history (Mensalao) and the traffic of
favors.
Both the so called "Elites" and the leaders of the masses
are equally to blame for many problems Brazil currently
faces. Those in high places want to continue their undisputed
rule while continue to keep the masses financially
illiterate, poorly educated, and in the dark.
The masses leaders only care about enriching themselves,
and emulating those in the so called "Elites."
To say that foreign powers, the Portuguese heritage, etc.
are responsible for that is simply disingenuous. Both
PSDB and PT have to look at themselves in the mirror to
see where the problem lies.
5)Brazil greatest asset is not its vast land, and abundant
natural resources. Brazil's greatest resource is its people.
To quote from a famous Ghanian proverb:
"The ruin of a nation begins in the homes of its people."
When Brazilians see other Brazilians as nothing more than
pawns, suckers, inferior, and masses to be manipulated,
the country continues its ruin.
Envy and discredit of others runs deep in Brazil. The
corrupt automatically assume there is envy on them
for their slick ways. However, when someone comes up
with a great idea, or a revolutionary thought, or invention
or great discovery, Brazilians more than any other major
nation in the world simply scoff and laugh them off.
Santos Dumont was not supported in his airplane. He was
not the first to invent the airplane, but he could have
been the father of a great aircraft company in the 1920s.
Monteiro Lobato could have drilled for oil of the coast
of Bahia, and started a private oil company that would
probably be one of the leaders in Latin America (more
than Petrobras).
I can see them coming:
"You are just jealous because your country is in a crisis."
"Yeah but we have 5 world cups"
"We are the happiest people on Earth"
"You hate that Brazil is becoming powerful"
About this: "Are you willing to organize a massive protest? Are you willing
to flood Brasilia with 10 million signatures, mails and e-mails
as well as protest on the streets? Until you are willing, nothing
will get done."
This is the real reason nothing will ever change.
I offered to sponsor buses from people all over the country to go to Brazilia and pressure congress to change the constitution to allow corruption to be punished more harshly.
The post on which I offered to do this had more than 500 comments.
One single soul contacted me, and when I emailed this person, he never answered back.
I offered to create a dashboard on the net to monitor all of PACs projects and donate software, hardware, time, bandwidth (currently the latest report published on PAC's site is from 2010) and not a single soul showed any interest.
Brazilians love to be victims, but hate to take action.
They deserve what they get, pure and simply. They do.
Well said.
Sad reality, but well said.
Whining about corruption is being a victim.
Taking actions is a completely different thing. While you so called "patriots" are wearing clown noses in pointless manifestations in Avenida Paulista, the new National Education Plan, which is going to decide whether the rate of investment in Education in Brazil is going to be 7,5% or 10% (now it's 5,1%) of the GDP, is going through bureaucratic processes in the Congress, so it can go later to the senate.
Cite at least ONE source of your so beloved patriotic media that even mentioned that....?
Yeah, I thought so.
Taking actions to me is pressing for important (let me stress that, important) laws to quickly take place. How about, instead of complaining that the World Cup is going to drain money from us, press for the infrastructure projects to hurry? How about, instead of offering to create dashboards and pay buses to get our asses to Brasilia in The Economist comments section, we start pressing for a judiciary reform?
Remember this children: corruption it's not a cause. It's a consequence.
I think you have some reading comprehension problems: my proposal was exactly to get people to go to Brasilia to change the "clausula petrea" of the consituicao to enable corruption to be classified as a different kind of crime with much heavier penalties.
How is that NOT start pressing for a judiciary reform?
And yes, corruption is a consequence of a crappy culture, couldn't agree more.
Heavier penalties doesn't change a thing in an inefficient system. As a matter of fact, inducting heavier penalties in a judiciary system like ours will probably increase the use of the judiciary as a destruction tool to enemies of a few.
The judiciary (and, for the God sake's, open a bit your mind. It doesn't exist solely to fulfill your craving for politician blood. It has other uses, which probably are beyond your knowledge) is inefficient. Adding tougher laws won't make it efficient.
Also, you're the one with comprehension problems: reforming the judiciary means changing the way things are done in the judiciary. To modify that part of the system. Adding more laws isn't a reform. You should study a bit of law to expand your horizons.
Now, shall we stop with the petty offenses exchange you started and debate like the grown ups (I think) we are?
My original offer was: 2 years period of grace (anybody who comes forward will become unelectable for life but wont go to jail) followed by internationally mediated corruption crimes court i.e. go OUTSIDE the system altogether, clean things up, then start from scratch.
So we are in agreement there.
The system is compromised, no question about it.
Things will only change with popular pressure, assuming that the other option (a very specific kind of pressure involving violence, if you catch my drift) isn't really available.
Ambitious indeed.
"Internationally mediated court".
I'd love to know who would be interested in spend their time on something that we should do? Also, I don't think that most of the world share the same level of hysteria of the Brazilian middle class on the Corruption matter.
"My(...) offer"
I hope (and I'm being ironic, I'm genuinely interested) you have some base and confident sources to do a legal claim on your own. After all, I don't think the OAB would take very well hints about the legal process from a lay.
And I assume you are talking about a revolution of some kind? I think it would be silly from me to think you're talking about a leftist revolution, so I'll assume that you're talking about a Military Dictatorship comeback? If that's the case, and I hope not, I'm glad that people are not supporting your offers and claims.
I have no background in law, as you could probably notice.
But it is clear that the system is compromised. I am quite sure mediators (who by the way are for hire, there is a market for that) if properly rewarded would be quite willing to get something going. As for the legality of that is up to society to force it down and do something.
Leftists revolutions never solved anything anywhere.
Seems though that you are quite fond of seeing how things cant work.
Why dont you share with us how would you make them work?
"This is going to be my last post for some time to come."
James AntiBr, don't go ... you are a laugh a minute.
Troll, you forgot to mention the pastry chef in Rio, or that ZIM gets half as many tourists as Brazil, or that quote from Plato's Republic. Why is that?
Well, your own first sentence proves you are inapt to legislate. I'm afraid to say, sir, your legal claims on what you think the law should be are completely illegitimate.
Also, the military are the reason for most of the political and economic problems we had since the 80s. The PND II was a complete mess, and just accentuated problems we had, like inflation and external debt. So stop this nonsense of "the military were right" crap. I can (using sources and facts) show you, if you don't know, that the problems of inequality, housing, violence, inflation and external debt are their fault.
How things can work, you ask me? Education, a reform of the judiciary, lower income inequality. Everything you like to repeat as intrinsic to the Brazilian people, like corruption, can be found in any population in similar conditions (high income inequality, low education) from similar cultural backgrounds (ex colony/explored country). It's a really simple equation, and, as I said, imposing heavier penalties to an unfair system is totally inefficient. You got to solve the reasons, not the consequences, as I said yesterday.
So you are saying Chile and Uruguay weren't colonies? Because they aren't really corrupt are they? Your theory is full of holes. Singapore isn't corrupt, neither is Hong Kong, and they were as explored as a country can be. Oh wait, it is confucianism right? Oh wait it can't be because china is confucian and more corrupt than Brasil.
And where exactly was it said that the military were right? Some persecution complex much? Housing problems and inflation happened waaaaaaaaay before the military. Seems like you might not have studied history much? May I recommend Celso Furtado?
Tell you what: once perpetual prison is the penalty for corruption, by definiton the incentive decreases, regardless of the reforms that are obviously needed. So I don't buy your limited approach on "making the system efficient". True, my approach focuses on effect not cause, but to tackle the causes wont result in the quick gains needed to prevent further slippage.
My theory is full of holes? Your obsession with Crime and Punishment is even worse. Really, are you such a simpleton that you believe that all problems in Brazil are a result of corruption or that we are naturally dumb? Can't you see the difference between Uruguay and Chile and the rest of Latin America? Have you really read Celso Furtado at all, the history of enslavement in Brazil, the plantations, the messed up economic development the military planned (that resulted in even WORSE income inequality and housing problems, since most of the population before the military period lived in the rural areas, not in cities. May I suggest you read about the history of the Favelas and how they are on the rise since the mid 70s?) or about the different kinds of colonization through the world? Are you really so narrow minded that you can't see the difference between a member of the ASEAN and a member of the MERCOSUL?
Do you really think we need "quick gains"? Let ME tell you what: that's what your beloved corrupt politicians have been doing in the last 50 years in Brazil. Quick solutions, let the major problems be solved later.
You tell me nothing. You haven't the slightest idea of how a democratic constitutional state works.
I actually shouldn't have asked whether you were really such a simpleton. Your proposition to make a legal adjustment in the judiciary, even you having NO legal instruction, just show how simple your view of the world is.
Oh now I said tha ALL problems stem from corruption.
There are voices in your head and you call them Chinaskihsvalle.
Have a happy Quaaludes induced life, Sir.
How about that pastry chef in Rio, Troll?
Correct me if i am wrong, but was not in the 1970´s that happened no one, but 2 two oil crushes? The prices of oil and rates raised and reached the sky from night to the next days...Oil crisis that generated international claims (from the international creditors) to payment the money borrowed from the developed nations to the developing ones,and also much higher interest rates in those foreign debts? So, i do not think that the military are the ones to blame for external financial crisis,in the 1970´s and 1980´s, the same that caused a lot of internal damages in the 3rd world countries, as they were called back at that time. And i am not one defending a military regime, i am just showing some facts. I am for democracy.
Correct me if i am wrong, but was not in the 1970´s that happened no one, but 2 two oil crushes? The prices of oil and rates raised and reached the sky from night to the next days...Oil crisis that generated international claims (from the international creditors) to payment the money borrowed from the developed nations to the developing ones,and also much higher interest rates in those foreign debts? So, i do not think that the military are the ones to blame for economic crisis in Brazil,in the 1970´s and 1980´s,and nowadays, the same that caused a lot of internal damages in the 3rd world countries, as they were called back at that time. And i am not one defending a military regime, i am just showing some facts. I am for democracy. And i´ve read Furtado a lot, so, i warn you, do not mention him as a i am an economic illiterate. One of his books i read was "Formação Econômica do Brasil".
...but i completely agree with you that a simple change in the laws are not going to produce any good for Brazil. The problem does not reside in laws but in institutions and people.
Well, you're not the only one reading Furtado. May I recommend you also Caio Prado Junior?
Anyway, research more about the II PND, and what today economists and Furtado says about it.
Okay, i´ll do it. I have to say that i am a little out-dated and that i have read Furtado and theories about "desenvolvimentismo" years ago, when i was attending classes in college. But, "Formação Econômica" i have read recently. But, yes, i remember that something went wrong in the II PND. I will read some Caio Prado Jr. But, i insist that not one but 2 two huge international problems have occurred back then and its influences were so obvious that i do not have to say twice. Thank you for the good information and recommendation. P.S: I am not an economist, i studied foreign affairs, but economy was a considerable part of the course, so i still remember what was lectured, very interesting indeed.
Oh no,no,no,no,no...
We are grateful for his presidency and now it is time to step for the next degree.
But know he only seems to care about his huge ego...
First of all, of course we know Brazil needs a great reform, a political one, a fiscal one, the SUS increase...and most of all, all together working for this goal, not following into the parties wish, but respecting Brazil's will and social development(not only GDP increase).
Lula just have faith in his believes, even if this mean to me and you the most prudent or not. Right or wrong (for those who think Brazil foreign policy for an example, have just to follow "big" countries), this man with his ministers changed a social scene in this country, and better than this, bring hope to millions of brazilians, who already have been forgotten by the past governments. By the way, it's not a big surprise when you see anyone Civita's magazine criticize Lula and get some Mendes montly-later "facts" to, as an analogy of his speak, "put a cover on Cachoeria's scheme". We all know that this one, with Marinho's Globo has always argued pro a military dictatorship here, even in it final days.
So if the Civitas are so bad why would have Lulla used it to bring Collor down?
If your "theory" was right Veja would never have attacked Collor.
They are not "bad". They have political interests. And for the Civitas, "the enemy of my enemy, is not my friend".
Marinho and Civita didn't helped Collor in the elections. They only messed up for Lula, who was really against their interests.
Hi Hank,
I don't believe in these terms of been good or bad to a government, and you're right. Like Heinz91 said, those fellows follow some political issues. Collor recently said Veja's it's not responsable for his impeachment, but Istoé with his interview with his driver at the time. Veja give some attention to Collor back at '89 as "the most spectacular policy carrer in our electorial history" but the jealousy of his brother(saying the right things to destroy your brother)not gave another chance to Veja if throw the scheme to the public, remembering Pedro's bring to Veja (and only accepted it to give your testimony inside the magazine's building) this interview because this veicule of information have a big power in the 90's.
Marinho's effort to put Fernando in presidency was detailed by Boni(a former Globo director) in a interview last year, including using some make-ups to faking some sweat and the eternal suitcase without nothing.
Vinicius and guest-issssii,
there is a very interesting blog that i have followed these past 2 years, it is multilingual, and we do talk about everything. Here is the link:
http://blogs.estadao.com.br/jpkupfer/mudanca-de-habito/#comments
Lula should learn to Hula: good cardio workout, central core strengthening, increase flexibility, lose weight, and helps move stuck arthritic joints..... Plus it is sexy Carnival preparation.
Well, it seems that US President Barack Obama got the moves (we could see him dancing on national live TV). Despite speculations to the contrary, being born in Hawaii, Obama can certainly Hula as well.
One can't help but notice how little that did to his approval rates.
Maybe if he was the President of Brazil. Maybe luckily that wasn't the case, because Lula, a short, overweight man in his sixties with only nine fingers, led Brazil through a worldwide crisis with extreme competency.
What we need to Brazil is a government that has a project for the country, be it left, center or right. The PT is the government since 2002 and has not presented any solution to the country to grow sustainably. we have only seen denouncing corruption in his government that despite all the evidence presented, there was never a conviction. This is making the country plummet eight positions in the ranking of competitiveness eleaborado by the organization (IMD), going to the humerus 46, a sample of 59 countries. In Latin America, Chile, Peru and Mexico are more competitive than our country. According to the survey, which among us is conducted by the Fundação Dom Cabral, the country goes wrong in the areas of trade internaconal, institutional framework, business legislation, productivity and efficiency of basic infrastructure and technology. In education, we deal the "honorable 54th place among 59 countries. The result, unfortunately, Standing no surprise to those who follow the economy braileira.
'Brazil needs to reform for grow with his breath'
Great comment.
We all know Lula is a crook. He came from "the party of ethics" and embraced the worst cultural inheritance the country sported throughout its hundreds of years of incompetence.
The thing that strikes me as most sad in how Brazilians face this whole Lula issue is that they are STILL, to this date, framing this discussion as a "left vs right", "PT vs PSDB", without realizing that the truth is regardless of who was in power the results were pretty much similar: corruption, incompetence, crumbling infrastructure, more corruption, etc, etc, etc. True, there are mild differences between each party but all in all it's the same.
The problem is not who is in power. The problem is the moral fiber of the people. Or to put it differently: the power is as much as the guy who steals in Brazilia as the guy cutting a line with "jeitinho". This mentality permeates Brazil from bottom to top, so it's not really surprising that those on top are mostly thieves.
Now let's beef up some of the great stats you mentioned:
-Bolivia has higher literacy than Brazil. Yes, there are more than 20 million Brazilians who can't read, and I am not even talking about those who can barely read (and that are in office).
-Brazil is on 85th position on the Human Development Index, behind most countries Brazil arrogantly thinks is below them
-Latin America has 20 Nobel Prizes, and only one out of Brazil.
-There's not a single decent airport in the entire country.
-Zimbabwe, a country run by a batshit crazy dictator hosts almost 50% of all tourists that Brazil does in a year, yes, "the most beautiful country in the world" (as only Brazilians would say it). You read me right. Despite Carnaval, picanha, bundas, futebol, Iguacu, Brazil receives a paltry 4.4 million tourists per year. Or let's put it this way: Mozambique and Zimbabwe, receive as many tourists per year as Brazil.
And last but not least: only in Banana Republics or kleptocracies you can't drink water from the tap.
A country where you can't even have clean water to drink is not to be trusted and is not to be respected.
Until Brazilians admit that differently from what they think their country isn't "great" and "the most loved people in the world", they will continue to be the Banana Republic we all know it is, but few admit (and this is part of the problem, a big part mind you).
Countries who made the leap all had to go back, acknowledge its shortcomings and then plan for the future (biggest example: Meiji Restoration Japan). Why can't Brazil?
Oh I know why it can't, because of the poisonous combination of arrogance and ignorance.
Now let's hear what the apologists will say:
"Oh but our Portuguese cultural inheritance"
"Oh but the military government"
"Oh but the US has problems too"
"Oh but..."
I am Brazilian and I only can say: you are absolutly right!
Dude!
So well put! , they sure are optimists though,
ouve so esse sambinha feito de uma nota so...
Part 1.
Hank, I beg to differ a few points you made, but some I would have to say I agree.
Lula is a politician just like all others. Saying he's a crook with all his accomplishments while administering Brazil, is quite disrespectful, considering this man is one of the most important politicians in Brazilian history. It almost makes me feel you are not quite sure about Brazil's changes since 2003.
It is undeniable that Brazil was a country before 2003, and became another after.
Unfortunately, it has been said since forever that Brazil's problem is corruption, and that's the biggest lie of all.
Brazil's problem is IMPUNITY, the holes in our judicial system, and the lack of ethics, values and respect for its citizens is unbelieveable. Politicians/Lawyers who ocupy high chairs in the Supreme Court allow the corruption to keep on happening. What I mean is: corruption is a product of impunity.
In regards to the left vs right, PT vs PSDB... all countries have their political parties nonsense.
US political parties: Democratic, Republican, Tea Party, Independent.
France's political parties: Socialist, French Communist, Europe Écologie - The Greens, Left and Left Radical parties. On the right we have Union for a Popular Movement, Rally for the Republic, and Union for French Democracy.
These are only two examples, so you could understand my point of view. Every country has parties that disagree with each other's values and proposals. So, I didn't quite understand your comment about Brazilians not realizing this power struggle between parties. Normally the fanatics bring out the left/right nonsense, and those are the people we should avoid and not trust: the one's who treat politics as soccer or religion. Fighting for their parties no matter what! So if the biggest corrupt is in my party, it's ok. He must be ok, afterall he's a XYZ member, he must be good, right? And you are right. Most Brazilians only see flags, I try to see people and their actions, and their history. I read all, everything. That way, when I have an opinion over something, it's not because someone told me, neither I follow any family tradition when it comes to politics. I make up my own mind, and unfortunately I don't believe many people exercise their right to critical thinking.
I couldn't have cared less if Fernando Collor, Itamar Franco or FHC had accomplish what Lula had. No problem at all. The problem is: they didn't. Nothing against PSDB, but being Brazilian, and considering the history of my country, I can only assume they didn't take action when they could have.
When you spoke about politician's moral fiber, it made me think: Politicians are pupets. What is he talking about?
We have always been governed by big corporations. Always.
About cutting lines, cheating on taxes, and the eternal Brazilian saying: "to find a way" (a.k.a jeitinho), you are absolutely right. A person who steals a bottle of milk, and the politician that stole public money are no different.
Actually, they are.
The politician never gets caught, and if s/he does, nothing will happen. Really. (impunity)
The common men/women who might have stolen that bottle of milk, will surely go to jail (for an indefinite time), face a series of charges, will have to pay bail, and so many other things... and why?
Once again: impunity.
Wanna a recent example? You have probably heard about Eike Batista, one of the most successful entrepreneurs and richest personalities in Brazil. His son Thor Batista, who happens to be less than 22 years old, was driving a luxury Mercedes Benz sportscar (probably drinking, as beer cans were found on his car), had about 51 points on his driver's license (Brazilian DMV only allows up to 20 points a year per license), killed a man last month. What happened? NOT A THING.
Wanna hear what is really ludacris? A week later he was cruising around (driving a Ferrari, over the speed, by the way), AGAIN, and this time with no front license plate.
So, the guy kills a man, it is brought to EVERYONE'S attention he had 51 points on his driver's license, and he was still driving? REALLY?
The thing is his rich father (Eike Batista) does not support Dilma and Lula's governament, but he's personal friends with Collor and FHC, and a few other politicians, of whom none are linked to anyone from PT.
Part 2.
I understand Brazil has a long way to go (afterall it is a young country, and is going through the same process other countries already had been through). You chose to share a few bad numbers about Brazil, so I will take the liberty of sharing a few good ones:
- Brazil is the country with most success studies in regards to finding a cure for AIDS, as well as other STD's.
Our scientists are actually serving as examples to other nations. (I'm sorry, but that's more important than any Nobel Prize)
- Our literature is among the richest in the world. Take for example Machado de Assis, whose books have been translated to over 20 idioms.
- Needless to say Brazil is currently the 6th economy of the world.
- In a reseach involving over 50 countries, Brazilian people were considered the friendliest.
- Even though Brazil is an emerging economy, it already has 40% of internet users in Latin America.
- 97.3% of kids from 7 to 14 years old are going to school.
- Brazil has Fernando de Noronha, and if you ask me I would assure you Fernando is the most beautiful place I have ever been. The thing is, there are limited amount of tourists allowed in the islands, the cost is high, so it's a process, but totally worth it. (I'd prefer to go to Fernando de Noronha then Mozambique... but that's just me, I guess.
- We are the largest country in South America.
- Brazil has the largest rain forrest in the world.
- Thanks to plants that grow in Brazil, several vacines could be developed.
- Brazil is part of MERCOSUL (Common Market of South, in English), ASO (American States Organization), WTO (World Trade Organization), CCPL (Community of Countries of Portuguese Language), LAADI (Latin American Association of Development and Interchange), OAAC (Organization of Agreement of Amazonic Cooperation), USAN (Union of South Americans Nations), I-AC (Iberian-American Conference), LU (Latin Union) BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China - union of the richest emerging countries) - we do keep good relations.
- Scientists have estimated that there may be up to four million species of plants and animals in Brazil. More and more species are discovered everyday.
- A historic moment is upon us. Brazilian economy has overtaken the UK in size during December 2011. This has created very attractive opportunities for UK businesses and for UK investors. Let's see:
- US, UK and European economies are in serious difficulties.
- US, UK and European property markets are in poor shape and the outlook is very uncertain.
- Brazil's economy has shown consistent growth for 11 years and looks set to continue.
- Brazil's real state market is strong and, with government financial support to the tune of US$40bn to provide good homes for Brazilians, is looking forward to continued good performance. (don't worry, we won't make the same mistake as the US, that was a good lesson to learn what happened in 2008.)
- Mortgages came available to middle market buyers in 2007.
- 97% of Brazilian house owners do not have a mortgage.
- The Brazilian economy is growing consistently at close to 5% per annum, and has been for every year of the last 10 years, the growth in wealth arises from growing sales of natural resources in energy, food, oil and mining. This will continue. The middle class is growing and getting wealthier. Of Brazil’s 195m people, 55m people entered the middle class in the last 3 years and 85 million people are now in Brazil's middle class.
- Demand is well in excess of supply and will remain so. That is generating large profits for developers.
You commented: "And last but not least: only in Banana Republics or kleptocracies you can't drink water from the tap."
I don't fully agree. If anyone who has never been to Brazil reads this, they are probably going to think there are monkeys and jags cruising around the streets among people.
Brazil doesn't yet have drinkable water everywhere, but we are getting there. I drink water from the tap, so do a lot of my friends. Let's not generalize. Besides you are not talking about India, Congo, Burundi or Zimbabwe.
You know, bottom line is we all got to be thankful for the right to express ourselves, but debates such as this should not be based upon anger, as that makes us blind and irational.
Maybe that's the problem with Brazilians, the inability to respect other people's point of view, even though we might not agree with it.
Not agreeing doesn't mean we can't respect other people's perspective.
I don't believe Brazil has a problem moving forward because of the "poisonous combination of arrogance and ignorance" (as you said), but rather because Brazilians are just now seing the light in the end of the tunel. I don't believe people are ignorant because they want. But a lot of Brazilians have been kept in the dark for so long, that now with internet, and digital inclusion people are becoming more aware of things that have been going on in Brazil for decades and decades.It's changing, sloowly, but it's happening.
Correction: it's just as important as any Nobel, and not more important than...
..
"Besides you are not talking about India, Congo, Burundi or Zimbabwe."
You seem to imply that Brazil is much better than these countries, or that Brazil is above them.
That's quite arrogant.
At the same time you want people to respect Brazil, you don't respect other countries with their own achievements either.
You seem to imply that because Machado de Assis was translated to 20 languages, then Brazil should get a pass and isn't "that bad". "Oh look, you will get diarrhea and crap your guts out if you drink water from the tap, but hey, we have Machado de Assis, aren't we cute? Can we get a pass mommy, and be considered civilized?" No you can't!
Or because Fernando de Noronha is so beautiful, then we can consider Brazil as "special".
This is a part of the problem: other countries have their Machado de Assis, other countries have their Fernando de Noronhas. Other countries have their scientists. Other countries have (include whatever you want).
None of this matters. What matters is what quality of life the people is getting, and Machado de Assis, Pixinguinha, Lesco-Lesco and Arrelia have nothing to do with that.
NOTHING.
It's the past. Living in the past doesn't make a future.
Let me spell it out for you: Brazil is as special as any other country, which is the same as saying "Brazil isn't special" which leads to the obvious conclusion: none of that crap you mentioned matters. Every country can get one tiny little success and spread all over it. Cambodia has Angkor Wat (and the Killing Fields), Tanzania has the Kilimanjaro (and 6% of the population with AIDS), Malaysia has the Petronas Towers and thousands of islands as beautiful (if not more) than Fernando de Noronha.
Don't you see? None of that feel good crap you mentioned matters.
In fact, the longer Brazilians need to cling to these micro victories to hang their self-esteem to, the longer they will be content with themselves, and the longer changes will be postponed because hey "it isn't that bad, we have Pixinguinha and 5 world cups, who cares about having one single decent airport, we can always relax and read Vidas Secas on a traffic jam on the way back from the airport, and realize how Seu Sarney da Bolandeira has screwed his Maranhense brethren in Real Life Vidas Secas in a scale that would make Graciliano weep, but who cares, we have Padim Cicero and the Elevador Lacerda so we are cute!"
Now your first post has a bunch of misconceptions that aren't really funny, like "Eike Batista dont like PT", which is crap since he paid millions to Jose Dirceu to get the inside scoop on a lot of stuff, not to mention his latest propaganda bit with Dilma (in which a chief of state wears the clown costume of OGX, which is ludicrous to say the least).
Then your sad illusion that Lula governed in a vaccuum, instead of inheriting a state who was put on track economically, at least partially by FHC.
I am betting you never lived abroad and never really dealt with anyone who travelled much abroad either, you never dealt with a foreigner trying to accomplish anything in Brazil.
If you did you would realize:
1-How the feel good crap you mention means nothing
2-How behind brazil really is from any sliver of respectability
3-How deep on the wrong track brazil is, while it is still thinks "the end of the tunnel is near"
But hey, keep deluding yourself. We have Caetano Veloso! We have Pao de Acucar, we have Paulo Coelho! Who needs literacy! Who needs civilization! Who needs heath! Who needs safety!
We are happy, as we said it yourself so what else matters!
You are mistaken, but it's ok. It's still valid, it's YOUR point of view.
When I wrote my reply to your comments, it was not a personal attack.
Yes, I have lived abroad, for 18 years straight. (I went to college and have paid my taxes in the US for 18 years).
I am really sorry for you. I really am.
Good luck in life.
I never considered your post as an attack....
Well, just an attack to common sense, logic and reality...
When you call someone arrogant, to me it's a personal attack.
No, you absolutely did not in any way, shape or form attacked my common sense, logic and reality.
That's your projection. Not mine.
Take care.
Here's what I said:
-----------------------
"Besides you are not talking about India, Congo, Burundi or Zimbabwe."
You seem to imply that Brazil is much better than these countries, or that Brazil is above them.
That's quite arrogant.
-----------------------
If someone here said in another post "hey we are not talking about India, Ghana, or Brazil, we are talking about [insert country here]" you would be up in arms talking about how arrogant they were.
Well, you do exactly the same thing, and are not honest enough to admit it.
A simple: "Gee, Chinaski, you are right I shouldn't have said that because I am sure that these countries also have their Fernando de Noronhas, scientists and Machado de Assis" would do it, but you will never do that, because you actually DO think Brazil is "special", or "more special" than other countries.
While we are here: it is pretty common in these boards to see Brazilians being all arrogant about other Latin American countries.
To put things in perspective:
-Latin America has 20 Nobel Prizes, but only one out of the country of Machado de Assis (by the way Brazil never won a literature nobel prize despite all this literary might, translated to GASP 20 languages!!!! interesting eh?)
-Brazil's per capita income is exactly at the MIDDLE of the region i.e. Brazil is MEDIOCRE in that too
-Several countries that Brazil considers itself "above" of are higher up in meaningful rankings: Bolivia, a landlocked dirt poor land has higher literacy rate for example
-Brazil is currently sitting at the pathetic 85th position in the Human Development Index ranking, behind countries it feels it is superior to such as Equador, Peru, Jamaica, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Trinidad, Barbuda, Mexico, Bahamas, Cuba, Uruguay, Chile, Argentina
-Chile, half a desert of a relatively resources poor country (no oil / energy, mostly copper and guano as main resources) is a STAGGERING 40 POSITIONS ABOVE Brazil. 40! FORTY. Chile had a dictatorship perhaps much worse than Brazil's.
If you don't realize how Chile's success proves Brazil's complete and absolute failure as a nation then you shouldn't really be on the internet.
Now let's dispel the classic crappy excuses that will be used as a feel good story to not put Brazil's pathetic human development index position:
1-"but we have a latin culture": Chile has a latin culture too, and occupies number 22 in the corruption perception index, above the US and France. Uruguay sits at 25 by the way. Brazil occupies position 73, close to Ghana and just slightly above China, a kleptocracy if there ever was one
2-"Oh but their population is so small, it's easier to manage": if that was a problem they wouldnt have more Nobel Prizes than Brazil (they have twice as many by the way, both in literature). Their population is 1/15th of Brazils yet they achieved a much higher intellectual and economic success with FEWER NATURAL RESOURCES. And gasp, they dont have Fernando de Noronha, meaning they aren't as special and cute as Brazil!
3- You can drink water from the tap in Chile. In Brazil, that is a recipe to a trip to the hospital, which are pretty crappy of their own accord.
4-Do you want me to talk about South Korea and compare where it was after the war and Brazil? Oh I didn't think so either.
I'll say it again: clinging to bullshit fake glory like Machado de Assis, Pixinguinha, World Cups is what Banana Republics with little to feel proud of do. Their self-esteem is so low they need any sliver of success to feel good, instead of doing what any decent country did in the face of adversity and putting their collective heads down and working their way out of a pathetic existence.
Do you mind reminding us who's the only Brazilian Nobel Prize winner? In my recollection Brazil has none, zero, zilt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Medawar
Notice that he left Brazil when he was 13, never to come back.
"I learned to not try to convince anyone. The work of convincing is a lack of respect.
Is a colonization attempt of another."
Saramago
"Aprendi a não tentar convencer ninguém. O trabalho de convencer é uma falta de respeito.
É uma tentativa de colonização do outro."
Saramago
I am 47 and we all drank water from the tap when growing up. As to being arrogant, Brazilian people are not any more or any less than any other people. USA makes it hard for us to visit, we go to Europe. As you might know, he who has money in Brazil has a lot of it, Brazilians will not beg to come into a country that does not wants us. We sufferred with Spain's truculency when we Brazilians needed to make a overlay to another coutry in their airports, see where Spain is now. Everyone has the right to be proud of their heritage. We Brazilians may act a notch up than the USA with their "World Footbal Campionship" even though it is only played here. By the way, Santos Dumont first flight in a heavier than air craft was recorded in a short movie three years before the Wright bros. It is my belive that such flight to be the first greatest human achievment recorded on a moving film. How is that for arrogance?
I will give to you that Brazil has the gvnmt it has due to their own choice. I spent eight months there in 2009-2010. I could notice the diferences. They are deep, they are real. Lula and his gang are still doing everything you say, however Dilma is not taking prisioners: "Off with their heads!" , that is how she is governing. You faulted in mentioned how many people has left her first and second tiers of govnmt. due to abuse of their position. She is not taking the usual " I did not know that it was happening" . If you are with her, it is your job to know. It is a great first step towards a cleanear gvnmt.
Since the British Empire conspired to the fall of our Monarchy, the republic has done all you said, governing to benefit themselves, wich is a shame.
U.S economy is ten times bigger than Brazil´s economy, i suppose. Maybe more, well,if you sell 10 Brazil´s and yet the U.S worth is much higher.
U.S is still waging wars there are already coming to an end, and now its powers are re-established in those regions of the world. Now the profits come. The rates of the U.S are 1.5 per cent and still attracts much more international money than countries like Brazil in which real rates are too much higher.
Let´s talk about infrastructure, no? Hell yeah, you have nothing at all to argue on that, have you? Technology advances?
Education? Eradication of Poverty? And fight against violence and robbery against decent people? I heard that the so-called "minors of age", teenagers, do whatever they want in Brazil, rob, kills...I guess, your advances are just too modest numbers that do not proves anything to yourselves or to the international community. And do not improves lives really. You are stealing from the real mid-class and giving to the poor, for what? Create a fake new mid-class? People a little above from poverty lines could not be called mid-class anywhere, that has a name and it is called to lie. Socialism that´s what it is, the culture of lies and incompetence. There should be no reward for the incompetent and cocksucker. Brazil= backlash. Brazil and its Kleptocrats are a international laughinstock, really are.
Depois de tanto tentar convencer-nos das baboseiras propagandísticas de que o Brasil do futuro é agora, de que temos, por exemplo: Fernando de Noronha e Machado de Assis( obs:trocando em miúdos, pois sei que você não o disse "o país do futuro"literalmente, com essas palavras, então não venha argumentar que eu mudei deliberadamente e falseei o que vc disse). Mas apenas o que vc quis mostrar como avanço. É todo esse entusiasmo sem apresentar o que realmente interessa.
Depois de tanto tentar convencer você cita Saramago e diz que não quer colonizar o outro. Isso é mal de mulher, de brasileiro, ou do ser-humano, me pergunto?
Isto é que inversão de lógica, hein moça?
Você me parece uma boa pessoa mas o seu modelo mental foi moldado, de forma a acreditar também em fadas e doentes, pois acreditar no Enorme Avanço do Brasil na Era ( político fulano de tal, nem vou citar nomes)requer muito esforço para acreditar em mentiras ou em meias-verdades. FATO: O BRASIL ESTÁ APENAS LIGEIRAMENTE MELHOR em alguns aspectos, beneficiou-se enormemente de políticas econômicas adotadas ainda nos anos 1990, então, não é obra do político da ocasião ou da oposição apenas. Foi uma questão de erros e acertos em época certa.
E, beneficiou-se, de forma gigantesca, da conjuntura da economia internacional, antes da crise financeira internacional parecia estar funcionando muito bem, então o Brasil pôde exportar matérias primas, commodities agrícolas e bens sem qualquer tecnologia agregada, a preços relativamente alta pois a demanda era alta, até porque o Brasil até hoje não se deu ao trabalho de investir em tecnologia ou ao menos de copiar, ou, melhor dizendo, incorporar tecnologia ao importar equipamentos de fora. Não há interesse em fazer o que é certo, pois não beneficia os já tão beneficiados pela manutenção do STAUS QUO. E esses beneficiários NÃO SÃO SOMENTE AS ELITES herdeiras das capitanias hereditárias e dos grandes especuladores financeiros ou de terras, na verdade, os beneficiários são todos aqueles que detém o poder. Não importa quem seja. POdem até querer desenvolver o país, ter esse querer, mas, as suas atitudes não refletem esse querer, pois costumam sabotar os importantes projetos ao dilapidar os recursos que deveriam ser utilizados na transformação da sociedade e de suas estruturas. Há um enorme custo de oportunidade nisso, e o custo é a nossa própria existência com dignidade. Já estou de saco cheio do Brasil e de mentiras e otimismo mal embasado. ASsim que eu puder caio fora.
Lula's actions have always been consistent with his own political objectives.
When most state owned and some large private banks were broke in the late 90's a very succesful federal bailout (PROER) had to be put in place by then president Cardoso. As in opposite way to what would happen 10 years later in America, the banks' owners lost their seats in the boards and most of their money. Lula claimed that PROER was a programme specificaly designed to take money from the poorest into the bankers pockets.
When Brazil decided to put an end to 50 years in oil extraction monopoly freely granted to highly ineficient state owned Petrobras, Lula sold the story as a programme aimed to transfer our wealth to foreign companies. As we know, they paid expensive royalties (in public auctions)to earn the right to research the existence of oil. Then they found oil, and now they have been producing oil that would have to be imported without those reforms in the sector. In the day Brazil self declared it had no longer deficit in oil production, guess what? Lula gets in the stage with noisy propaganda and take as his own the merit of reforms he had previously fighted fiercely.
The same modus operandi may be seen in his opposition to Lei de responsabilidade fiscal (a law that imposed limits for debt and local states ability to run fiscal deficits), the introduction of an independent central bank, the adoption of floating foreign exchange, prizatizations and so on. He was benefited from all such measures that he had previously opposed to and took the benefits as his own merits.
Worse than all is Lula's role in the institutional side of the country. One of his main flags was the fight against corruption. Not only he didn't take any single measures in this plan, but all of his old felas were caught in the middle of a massive schemme of corruption and "purchase" of congressional votes.
He remained in power thanks to good economic performance driven by sky rocketing commodities prices, a very low starting point of leverage in the economy (private credit represented 24% of GDP when Lula took the office), large investments already commited by recently privatized companies and his own choice not to screw things up (which represented him throwing out in trash all his historical rethoric about the markets and one-sided debt haircut).
Lula's supporters hate Veja or any other midia that shows a bit of reality. In the early 90's, this same magazine was the main source of information that led to the resign of former president Collor (a free markets advocate). Then, they believe Veja was part of a valuable democratic resistance to misuse of power. When their guru gets caught in infamous similar situation Veja becomes part of a conspirancy against a "hero".
Every country has the politicians it deserves. Self denial will not take Brazil to better times.
It's nice that you mentioned the fact that in the 90's Veja was the main source of information that to led Collor to be impeached for corruption. back in those times, Lula and members of Worker's Party used to walk around in the congress with a Veja Magazine under their arms like religious people do with the Holy Bible. The Worker's PArty was member of the opposition in those days. They wanted Colloer out. Now, decades later, both, Collor and Worker's PArty, are working together to destroy the reputation of Veja and all magazines and newspaper that don't accept demagogy and corruption from Worker's Party and it's allies.
One of the many inventions Veja made you swallow, but, really, even Istoé was more important in Collor's impeachment. They got the driver (or whatever his work was), remember? The fact is that guys in Veja are pissed because Lula didn't help them out with their HSBC loan. They are so drowned in debts that HSBC pratically owns them, pretty much like PUC-SP.
And also, their readers hate any attempt on wealth redistribution.
And also, PT sucks as much as any other party. Maybe not as much as DEM.
The president Fernando Collor was accused by his own brother, Pedro Collor, during an interview to Veja Magazine in may 1991. thats where everything started to come out.
"Lula is a gangster", Gilmar Mendes said to Veja magazine. And he said again on tv. There is nothing wrong with this report. The Economist and Veja are looking for facts. Congratulations for telling the true. More magazines should write more about this topic because here in Brazil people have already forgotten what realy happend (in other words: just a few brazilians are worried with breaking the corruption).
Many more people go to the Gay Parade than anything politically related.
Those are Brazil's priorities.
Then they complain that they are taken advantage of.
I mean, what would you expect right?
It's absolutely amazing that The Economist reproduces, to the entire world, what Veja has said. Nobody believes in Veja anylonger here - and Mr. Nelson Jobim, who was in conversation with ex-President Lula and Gilmar Mendes, said nothing alleged by Mr. Mendes was said.
By the way, it was found out that some of Veja's covers were chosen by the "capo" of the gambling scandal, Carlinhos Cachoeira. Can this source be trusted?
I'm very disappointed with The Economist. I think the magazine should look for more trustworthy sources.
The Economist is a conservative magazine, whose audience is mostly right-winged capitalists. Veja would be their closest counterpart in Brazil. So it does make sense that TE would use - and acknowledge - Veja. It is the Brazilian people that should not. After all, WE are the ones that suffer the consequences in the end, isn't it? So be always very aware when you read TE. Always check and double check their resources and most of all, never take them for granted, especially the very angry and "choreographic" angry replies bashing Brazil. You will be impressed to realize that such replies are also very common when TE talks about USA, India, China and most of the EU countries. Coincidence? Ha! Think again!
leftist people are all the same. Veja is the only serious news magazine which reports point out and investigates corruption scandals involving Lula and his leftist friends (Goodfellas).That's why Lula's Worker's Party are constantly trying to implement censorship to the media in Brazil.They want to avoid embarrassing situations like this where magazines such as "Veja" or newspaper like "Folha de São Paulo" report corruption scandasl involving Lula and his friends. the latest one is this case this report refers to, where Lula simply ignored the basic tenets of democracy by threatening a member of the Supreme Court. Lula and his political party are very dangerous for brazilian democracy. Lula has a dictator personality, he feels the need to be in power and to be the center of attention. also, we cannot forget Lula is very good friends with Hugo Chavez, Fidel and the colombian terrorist group, FARC.
Be carefull with Lula Soprano.
I personally don´t like the way Veja reports are written, like blinking to the middle-class biases of its readers (without letting them know the blinking is manipulative). But so do many other papers and magazines in a slightly more elegant manner. About what was said of Mr Mendes... that is not so important to international eyes, since Lula is the big star tha caught world´s attention. After all, TE wants to be read, and details on possible Mr Mendes wrong doing wouldn´t be that interesting.
Angie,BR
we suffer from consequences of corruption Lula supports all over the country.
I particularly think that FHC was a better president for Brazil than Lula. However, I'm not so bigoted that can't understand how Lula used the good economic moment, which FHC and Itamar Franco started, helping a part of the Brazil population that was utterly ignored by the likes that read (and follow) Veja and Folha de São Paulo types of media. And for now, that is what counts for the majority, whether you like it, or not.
Veja and Folha followers never ignored the poorer part of Brazil. Actually, FHC is the president who created "Bolsa Família" which Lula afterwards only changed the name and until today he says this social program is his. hahaha I dont know if you remeber, if you dont you can watch on youtube, Lula criticized these social programs FHC created back in 2001 and 2002. Lula used to say FHC was buying votes from poor people by providing these social programs. but that is waht Lula himself ended up doing when he became the president, he took these social programas FHC had already created, changed the name to Bolsa Familia and invested huge huge amount of money to promote himself as the president who looked after the poor people. Lula is a professional liar and gangster. He then used the leftist part of the brazilian press to carry on promoting Lula as the best president Brazil ever had. and now, everytime magazines and newspaper such as Veja and Folha de São Paulo accuse Lula and his friend of corruption, Lula comes with the same alibis, saying he's been attacked by rightist elites and media.
bullshit !
FHC did not create the Bolsa Família. He created a series of programs (Vale gás, Bolsa escola e etc) in a smaller scale. They were supposed to be pilot programs - whoever deals with social programs and public policies knows that you DO NOT start any program in BIG scale - that would be evaluated and expended again if Serra won. Lula, centralized these programs and gave them the name of Bolsa Família. Lula's MAIN COMPLAINT about these programs was SCALE. He used to say they had to be bigger. Regarding the "followers of Veja e Folha" (Good description, BTW), they were and are the main critics of Brazil social programs. Until today, they sell the idea that Brazil is everything that James AntiBR, BR-NZ and other haters say here: that Brazilian women are whores because of funk; that the country will fall again; that our economy is ONLY commodities led; that slums are a cancer and people from the slums are all drug dealers themselves, etc, etc. Well, if that's the reality, Mr. Batista, than you'll be surprised to find out that this country is being led by the exception. Surely you understand that Brazil1s fertility rate is smaller than that one of USA and that just like around the globe, Brazilian women are giving priority to their careers and not to finding a man? That even the worst of Brazil economical forecasts preaches balance, but not recession, even if the world falls into one? That we Brazilians (especially the new C class) consume more services than goods? And most of all: That if all of us who leave in a slum were drug dealers, we would have taken the streets by now. Brazil has a lot to improve, but ignoring our efforts so far, only does a disservice to the country and it's people. I understand we want a better country - well, at least I do - but we don't have to play the part of the "docile ex-colony" for foreigners to get it. Especially when it is clear that the motivation is less than fair.
you said:
"Lula's MAIN COMPLAINT about these programs was SCALE. He used to say they had to be bigger."
I m sorry, but you are comletely wrong.
There are many videos on youtube man. go there, and watch them You will see Lula himself saying that FHC was buying votes when he created those social programs. type on youtube: "Lula, Bolsa família ea hipocrisia!" or "O Bolsa Família, segundo Lula, em 2009 e em 2000"
watchthem and the let me know waht you think.
TE is conservative, but comparing them to VEJA is just mean, man. And don't forget that Carta Capital brings in it's cover a not-so-little banner saying "WITH CONTENT FORM THE ECONOMIST".
The thing with brazilian magazines is that they try to hide their ideological stands, or at least make it look like the Truth, and not an opinion. TE may be very conservative, but they make their stands. That is good. Even when the cover is terrible (the rather dangerous monsieur Hollande. That was just mean, guys).
Mr Thomas M. the only ones, who do not know how biased and which type of bias each one of Brazilian magazines carries on, are people that do not read them, or children. Besides, defending this stereotyped reports from TE is playing the naive card, mate. Veja and Carta Capital are TE counterparts. Why do you think TE uses them????
I did see the video. It's a compilation ruffly edited that starts with Lula defending Bolsa Família (saying that it is not charity) and then it jumps to when he was complaining that we still have "voto de cabresto" and "compra de votos" in Brazil. I'm sorry, but I do know Brazilian history and the difference between charity, "enforced voting" and "voting shopping". I truly hope that this is not your ONLY resource, though...
you are a joke.
yes, it's a compilation. it's compilation of two videos to show how hypocrite and liar Lula is. The first video is from 2009. according to Lula in this video from 2009, some people (opposition) complain about Bolsa Familia accusing it of keeping people who benefits from it lazy, it's actually a policy of social handouts. According to Lula in 2009 this is what the opposition think. Now, the second part of the video it shows Lula back in 2000 when FHC created many social programs, in this video from 2000 Lula says FHC is buying vote by providing those social programs, according to Lula, FHC was taking advantage of the poorer people and ignorant as Cabral and the portuguse did 500 hundred years ago when they first got to Brazil.
Angie,
in the end you say "I truly hope that this is not your ONLY resource, though..."
OF COURSE NOT ... this is not my only source to prove Lula is a liar. read his speach from 2003:
No dia 9 de abril de 2003, com o Fome Zero empacado, Lula fez um discurso no semi-árido nordestino, na presença de Ciro Gomes, em que disse com todas as letras que acreditava que os programas que geraram o Bolsa Família levavam os assistidos à vagabundagem. Querem ler? Pois não!
"Eu, um dia desses, Ciro [Gomes, ministro da Integração Nacional], estava em Cabedelo, na Paraíba, e tinha um encontro com os trabalhadores rurais, Manoel Serra [presidente da Contag - Confederação Nacional dos Trabalhadores na Agricultura], e um deles falava assim para mim: “Lula, sabe o que está acontecendo aqui, na nossa região? O povo está acostumado a receber muita coisa de favor. Antigamente, quando chovia, o povo logo corria para plantar o seu feijão, o seu milho, a sua macaxeira, porque ele sabia que ia colher, alguns meses depois. E, agora, tem gente que já não quer mais isso porque fica esperando o ‘vale-isso’, o ‘vale-aquilo’, as coisas que o Governo criou para dar para as pessoas.” Acho que isso não contribui com as reformas estruturais que o Brasil precisa ter para que as pessoas possam viver condignamente, às custas do seu trabalho. Eu sempre disse que não há nada mais digno para um homem e para uma mulher do que levantar de manhã, trabalhar e, no final do mês ou no final da colheita, poder comer às custas do seu trabalho, às custas daquilo que produziu, às custas daquilo que plantou. Isso é o que dá dignidade. Isso é o que faz as pessoas andarem de cabeça erguida. Isso é o que faz as pessoas aprenderem a escolher melhor quem é seu candidato a vereador, a prefeito, a deputado, a senador, a governador, a presidente da República. Isso é o que motiva as pessoas a quererem aprender um pouco mais."
what do you think about that ?
haha
come on, you have to admit.
so what other sources do you want?
Lula was caught on tape contradicting both himself and your own argument?
Will you ever be so elegant to admit, for a milisecond, that you might be wrong?
Or let's put it this way: can you admit that you were not as right as you thought?
No?
Geee. Why am I not surprised.
Next you will say that Plano Real wasn't really a FHC project, but Itamar's project.
neverending sources to prove Lula is the biggest scumbag liar in brazilian politics.
Here is another one:
In this video below Lula is very angry talking about how powerful the Sarney family is in Maranhão and Mr. lobão as well. Lula says that Sarney's family owns Globo TV and Mr. Lobão owns SBT TV in Maranhão state, and that's the reason why according to Lula himself, Mr. Sarney and his daughter, now governor of Maranhão, always win elections in Maranhão. According to Lula, Globo and SBT manipulates the voters by providing fake information about voting intention and always talking good things about Sarney's and Lobão's family. that's how they win elections in that state.
well, in the same video, we have Lula, years later, supporting Roseana Sarney in the elections for governor of Maranhao. and what happened to Mr.Lobao ? He was invited by Lula to become the Minister of Mines and Energy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pl5Tx95XWaM&feature=related
watch it and let me know what you think.
I couldn´t agree more. Very well thought! You are right, the majority of those readers do not care about the poor, the eternally marginalized.I agree with what you said about FHC and Lula. In addition, about the brazilian classic mid-class readers of the right wing press: they think they are the owners of the country and everything it does produce. They are greedy and selfish, they don´t want a real change in the scenario, the STATUS QUO cannot be changed or menaced, i am saying the obvious and i know it, but some redundancy seems necessary sometimes. They are still angry with some Lula´s measures like improving social distribution of wealth! These right wing people can not see things that seems so obvious to educated minds. Sick old men and sick old culture of privileges.They think that poor people exists in this world just to serve them well...oh hell...and it is not cliché. For those who dares to say i am wrong in this: You may want to label it, but you cannot change the truth.
The Economist is far more honest than anything we have in the "grande media" of Brazil. Thats what i think. Anyone can make mistakes but, in the end, what matters most is honesty and quality. TE congrats because you are admirable as a way to be informed.
Hi,
Why is cancer killing off South American Politicians?
Some say it's a part of an American conspiracy.
Corruption kills.
The famous ET Bilu has something with it, some say.
American conspiracy against leftist leaders... They are still living the Cold War.
Doesn't Hank the Troll have something to say about this topic?
What happens today in Brazil is a former president who was a great thief, covering up their cronies and trying to prevent them from going to trial. He acts like his good friend Hugo Chavez, trying in every way interfere with the judiciary and the Congress. The world fell in love with him and he disappointed everybody. He was the worst president that Brazil has ever had. Cynical, lying, corrupt, clumsy, vulgar and vagabond.
All that Lula does is good for Brazil and especially to Brazilians. Lula is the best president that Brazil has had in its history.
Lula took a good moment in Brazil's History. He is far from being to best brazilian to be President! I do prefer Dilma than him as commander, but the 'economic moment' isn't good as it was at Lula's age.
In visit to Buckingham Palace that many times it has been history witness, The Brazilian - former President Lula was staying there, he made his historical comment. - Oh, he said, a few years before, NOBODY would believe that he would be there, DOING defecate in the bathroom the QUEEN. But the British people is VERY sophisticated, I guess NOBODY fixed the declaration of OUR former president in the palace collection. This reminds me one sentence: - Each one is able to produce the exata measure than him may think.
Actually, to be fair, I think it should be remembered that Brazil's fiscal and economic situation was terrible by 2001-2002 (in fact, not even the inflation rate was under control, and let's not even mention the dismal growth rate, the increasing poverty rate, the account deficit, the growing public internal AND external debt etc.). Even the now so discussed interest rates lowered a lot: in the late 90's they had reached an astounding percentage of more than 30%, and in the last one or two year of Lula's government it had reached less than 10% (the inflation rate was basically the same).
So, Lula did not simply ripe the benefits of the Plano Real, which, let us again remember, was made in 1994 under President Itamar Franco, and not under PSDB President FHC. It would be impossible that all good aspects of Lula's government, without (supposedly) any changes at all, would derive from an economic plan made almost 10 years before and which wasn't enough to safeguard even FHC's later years of government from economic and social distresses, let alone Lula's government even later. Lula's policies were reasonable, largely market-oriented and did include some legal and administrative reforms (not enough of them, as we all know).
There can't have been just a "miracle" that suddenly by 2004 Brazil was becoming one of the world's most successful emerging countries, especially in social inclusion matters. People tend to focus only on economic data, which were quite good under Lula's tenure (an average of almost 5% a year), but what was really impressive was his government's achievement in social data that are more important, I have no doubt about it, than GDP growht: infant mortality decreased 47% in 2000-2010 (most of which under Lula's governments), an amazing feat; 40 millions of people reached the "lower middle class", or more properly a minimally decent way of life; the number of college students more than doubled; and more social advances. In general I do prefer Dilma as a more reasonable and fierce President, but I don't think we should dismiss Lula's role as one of the few Presidents under whose tenure the country did indeed change a lot (for the better).
I agree with. I just say that there were brazilians with more "brazilian spirit" than Lula. He still being a great leader, but could and should have done more in a positive way. I do applaud him because he did survive - specially in his first mandate - against a extremely combative opposition. Some oppositionist allies were criminals - ie, Cachoeira. Government allies could be worst marginals. But Lula could bring the country to a upper point in economic and institutional development level. He also brought DILMA to the Presidency. That's the most incredible thing. A lot of gangsters trying to be choiced and he did choice Roussef to support (she had 2% or less in the first eletoral census). More could have been done, although.
Mr Lula didn't implement any sturctural change in Brazil's economy during his two presidential terms. He only reaped the benefits of the reforms made by the previous president Mr FHC, which were expected to give long-term results when he would no longer be country's leader. I am not saying that one is better than another, but if Mr Lula had really taken good measures to extend the econmy's boom for a long time, we would not be suffering with deindustrialization and credit limitation. The reflex os his government is starting to surface now. Therefore, I don't think he would be a good president for the country, especially in this singular economy momentum. In fact , Mrs Roussef has been doing a much better then he ever did.
You obviously don't know the history of your own country, or are so blinded by ideology are incapable of objectivity. This continual blaming of a single politician for all of Brasil's problems just plays into the hands of those that are impeding reform. If FHC was such a wonderful president why are you mentioning currency reform that took place in 1994 before he was president? Why not say Itamar Franco was wonderful and FHC and Lula were terrible... see the logic By 1999 FHC's government was deeply unpopular, there was a major currency crisis and very little reform post-Plano Real occurred.
First major pension reform was initiated during Lula's first term. You might remember how it was passed, by minor parties blackmailing the PT or the PT buying them off to get it through, the Mensalão.
I'm no petista however, you can't "blame" Lula of continuing good policies from previous administrations, that is ridiculous.
One other thing links Lula and FHC, massive egos. Both have spent their time outside of office slinging mud at each other, both are as bad as one another.
As for deindustrialization, that isn't Lula or anyone else's fault other than a globalised economy. Deindustrialization occurring every economy as it develops, Germany included, which decided to specialise. Brasil will probably go down this route as logics and supply chains etc. are beneficial within the region.
Lula will never run again, that comment was merely a diversion to get the TV news talking about Haddad in São Paulo. Haddad currently have very lower recognition rates in SP and I even suspect Marta Suplicy staying aways from Haddad's launch was the same ploy. Haddad's name is across every news service in the country now, job done.
BR-NZ wrote (in quotes):
"As for deindustrialization, that isn't Lula or anyone else's fault other than a globalised economy. Deindustrialization occurring every economy as it develops, Germany included, which decided to specialise. Brasil will probably go down this route as logics and supply chains etc. are beneficial within the region."
Are you sure? Perhaps the segment below can shed some
light that deindustrialization is not happening in Germany.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxE-nUwyvG8
These days from cyber technology to biotechnology to
digital manufacturing, it requires hard sciences and
math. Brazil's PISA scores and a lack of strong VC
culture and support makes highly unlikely that it will
go down the road you envisioned.
Mea culpa. In terms of Germany I was discussing it historically, that deindustrialization occurred in the past as the world became more globalised. Germany is still a highly industrialised country, but no longer simply heavy industry but specialised technical industry.
The point I was making is that deindustrialization in Brasil is a combination of lack of global competitiveness and increases in importation via global trade.
The inconstancy of some of the posters here is the they like to blame Lula and advocated globalised capital at the same time.
There are a few other posts above by PT conspiracy theorists that I can't be bothered replying to, however in general to all of the "Lula is the devil" posters... Look, I'm sorry that your maid is demanding a decent salary and crazy things like "weekends off", I'm sorry that when you go on holiday there are people there that aren't from your private sports club... I know how hard it must be to see working class children stealing your child's free federal university education and that now you have to pay for one of Brasil's many poor quality private schools that will accept anyone as long as they pay. Brasil has gone to hell over the past 20 years, people no longer now their place and are beginning to have the same expectations in life as the people at the top used to have, and of course because they are stupid and the PT has bribed they they vote for communism!!!
You people are ridiculous, politicians are all pretty similar, this is not the Cold War and there are no commies hiding in the shadows trying to take control, just normal, dirty Brasilian politics. Left, right and centre they are all the same.