Lula approaches Cardoso

Latin American countries travel frequently similar processes at different times. Colonial origin could give them a common starting point; but the conditions specific to each of them, such as the number and spatial distribution of their populations; The presence of indigenous peoples and the types of natural resources, as well as the volume and country of origin of landed immigrants, imposed differences. Argentina has distinguished itself for decades in economic and socio-cultural achievements, but today it is surpassed by several countries in terms of the first type of achievement.

These differences have not prevented similar political processes from taking place at different times. Military dictatorships subjugated different nations in the region at one point; and the same thing happened with revolutionary armed struggles. The latest wave of similar processes in different countries shows the emergence of governments with ideologies linked to a “21st century socialism“Elected by popular vote. Venezuela inaugurated this form of social organization, which also occurred with its own characteristics in Nicaragua, Ecuador, Bolivia, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina. Peru has taken notable steps in this direction, while Colombia and Chile are grappling with indefinite conflicts. Finally, a reverse trend seems to be emerging with the recent Correa’s defeat in Ecuador and Evo’s decline in Bolivia. But the most relevant information on this subject is the dialogue between Lula and Cardoso in Brazil. Given the importance of this country and the figure of Lula in the region, this means a major setback for the “Latin American populist front”.

Given the importance of the figure of Lula in the region, this means a serious setback for the “Latin American populist front”.

The fact that these latest changes have taken place in democracy might suggest that we are facing a fickle electorate who don’t know what they want. However, it is majorities of citizens who are clear on what they expect from politics: to live without financial difficulties and to have the possibility of social advancement. But IThe complexity of the changes required makes it difficult for them to assess the proposals of the different political forces, forcing them to continue to seek solutions.. This is the price to pay to benefit from democracy.

Before formalizing the results, Peru protested Alberto Fernández’s greetings to Pedro Castillo

Responsibility for successive failures and changes must be sought in the political class of each country.Those who have not been able (in cases where there is a will) to implement adequate programs to overcome economic underdevelopment. Besides the magnitude of the struggle to overcome structural obstacles, it must take place with the opposition of other political forces which seek its failure. All this leads to the conclusion that It is essential to find agreements to develop and then implement a program capable of removing the obstacles responsible for unemployment, poverty and poor living conditions.. Agreements which must also contain policies so that this wealth is distributed equitably. Chile, without a political agreement, used a military dictatorship to carry out the first part of the program, but could not make the corresponding distribution. Populism, in turn, has favored distribution, but by failing to resolve economic stagnation, it has little to distribute.

One lesson that these repetitive and failed processes leave behind, and that our political class should remember, is that confrontations motivated in a search for Power which privileges personal and partisan benefits to the detriment of the well-being of the majority should be put aside. The dialogue between Lula and Cardoso, which started recently and is consolidated with new related declarations (including the recent joint document on Mercosur), shows the way forward. This will also allow put an end to authoritarian forms of government, whether on the right as in Brazil, or on the “left” as in our country.