Latin America, already facing many difficulties since the end of the commodities cycle, is going through a tough crisis in these post-pandemic 2020. What was classified as a “turn to the left” in the 2000s was exhausted and the left lived through difficult times, being dislodged from power in general, except in countries where it adopted openly authoritarian regimes (Venezuela and Nicaragua). Today many speak of the return of the left, as if a new turn had begun. The situation, however, is more complicated.
The left turn of the late 1990s and 2000s was partial. Not all countries in the region have embarked on it. There was, however, a more or less clear and unprecedented trend in the region, with the arrival of many leftist parties to power.
Despite their speech often bordering on revolutionaryism, a lot of Jacobinism and the prospect of perpetuating themselves in power, they were very moderate in their concrete proposals, having poverty as the center of their social policies and a limited developmentalism.
If there are continuities between that cycle and the current period, there are also many differences. It is above all a question of a different left, especially in Chile and Colombia, emerging in Ecuador (unlike Peru, where its conquest of the presidency seems quite fortuitous, despite a certain social accumulation).
limitations
The limitations of liberal democracy are at the heart of what has happened in Chile. Undoubtedly, the theme of neoliberalism and the restriction of social policies are central to the political explosion that began in 2019 with the increase in subway ticket prices.
The very structure of the political system was called into question. Professional parties and politicians came into the crosshairs of popular mobilizations, distinct parties gained prominence, and lists of independent candidates emerged for constituent elections, although the new Constitution does not incorporate significant institutional changes.
In Colombia renewed with the end of the armed conflict and partly in post-Correa Ecuador, huge social mobilizations, with the issue of democracy again on the agenda, point to a different approach to politics, with decentralized and autonomous social movements vis-a-vis the parties.
The theme of nature is highlighted, as it was only achieved in the best moments of the Lula da Silva administrations in Brazil, while the Colombian “living joy”, like the Andean “good living”, does not point to solutions for the problems of the great masses.
If Lula’s victory against the current far-right president, Jair Bolsonaro, is even likely, at this moment at least, this can hardly be classified as the return of the left to power. The situation is very different from that of the 2000s and, if this victory occurs, it will be more a result of unity against Bolsonaro’s open authoritarianism than actually support for Lula and the Workers’ Party, even if a consistent democratic front has not been constituted and mass mobilizations have been ruled out (at least until August 11, with the reading of the letter for democracy and demonstrations).
In Argentina, the situation of the government of Alberto Fernandez is very bad, having almost as its main opponent the vice president Cristina Kirchner, with the risk of electoral defeat in the next year hanging in the air. In Bolivia, despite the MAS’s dominance, Evo Morales’ eagerness to return to power, as usual by any means, could lead to a new political crisis, now involving his own party. In Uruguay, the center-right governs.
Threats to liberal democracy
In short, the Latin American political landscape seems today much closer to the situation of alternation of parties in liberal democracy as stabilized in much of the world.
The problems are very different from what a left supposes for which Leninism still appears as a strategic vector. The question that insinuates itself is the separation between the oligarchies, political, economic and financial, and the plebeians, those who are and feel excluded from the exercise of political power.
Liberal democracy became democratized throughout the 20th century, through the emergence of mass organizations, such as parties and unions, with on the other hand, paradoxically, a control and closure of its main echelons to popular participation.
We rarely saw the use of mechanisms of direct participation, such as councils and referendums, not to mention the classic Greek lottery, which allowed anyone to participate in power (not to mention that the popular character of power soon became a mere simulacrum in the “real socialism “).
The processes at the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century brought Latin America into contemporaneity with the part of the world with which it has the most similarities and political articulations – Europe and the United States. It shares the same problems, with no clear solutions, in addition to having little money. We need, however, to pay particular attention to political issues, actively facing them, especially with regard to the democratization of democracy.
If we need to operate in state political systems (executive and legislative), the societal political systems, where the plebeian citizens of modernity actually move, must find new channels of influence, interference and veto in relation to them. According to classical republicans, corruption corresponds to the decay of institutions. This is what happens with liberal democracy today.
The challenge of elections in Brazil
It is on this horizon that the Brazilian elections of 2022 must be placed. Defeating Bolsonaro and the threat of fascism adapted to the 21st century is crucial, an absolute priority. But this far right doesn’t gain support out of nowhere. If there are those in contemporary societies that support intrinsically reactionary values, it thrives due to the population’s dissatisfaction, especially when they do not see a transformative alternative on the left.
This is what has happened in Brazil since the 2013 demonstrations, rejected by the dominant forces on the left. The mistakes made by Lula and the PT were enormous in the government, including corruption, closure to society and the very bad period of Dilma Rousseff, in addition to an electoral fraud in 2014.
The party survived in part thanks to the president’s own impeachment. Defending itself, the PT seems to have come to believe in its complete innocence. But this is false – and that is not how the population sees it. Furthermore, the neo-patrimonialism that radically ravages the political system in Brazil, and that many people ridiculously try to deny, will make life very difficult for Lula or anyone else committed to democracy. The temptation to make the same mistakes will always be present.
A democratic government from January 2023 can only be a transitional one. But it is important not to imagine that recovering democracy can be reduced to resuming demoralized political formulas, complemented by social policies for the poor. It is necessary to clear the ground for a resumption of democracy that will deepen it in the long term. Otherwise, the crisis and the far right will always be lurking.
