NationStates Jolt Archive

For quite sometime now a political scandal of great magnitude has been tormenting Brazil. The Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers Party)´s presidential candidate, Luis Inacio Lula da Silva won the last presidential elections by a landslide. However, the Workers Party didn´t get a majority of seats in Congress. To pass legislation in Congress, several high figures of the WP (including the president of the Party and a top aid of Lula da Silva) set up a finantial scheme called "mensalão" that offered monetary compensation to several members of Congress in exchange for their support in approving various Bills. Up to this point, a direct link to Mr. Lula da Silva is yet to be made, but the reputation of the Governement seems to be irretrievably tarnished. This is specially painfull because the WP ran for office on a anti-corruption platform, that stroke a chord with large parts of the brazilian electorate, sick of the chronical corruption that is almost an institutional trait of brazilian politics. The WP has its roots on several left-wing movements, like the Movimento dos Sem-Terra (a grass-roots organization that has demanded land reform for a number of years). The WP, after being elected into office, pursued a quite conservative economic policy, cutting back on public spending, provocing a severe backlash from its leftist support movements, that now acuse Mr. Lula da Silva ( a blue-collar worker turned sindicalist) of selling out to capitalist policies.
So, do you think that Left wing movements in power always betray their purported ideologies? Does power inevitably corrupt even the more pure of heart?

Well, I've actually been reading up on Brazil lately, (I RP Brazil in another forum, and I've been reading up on it for my Political Science class as well.)

While I won't excuse the actions of Da Silva, the number and diversity of the parties in the Brazilian legislative bodies makes it nearly impossible to get anything accomplished. This has been a problem for Brazil for most of the 20th century, and is part of the reason why so many seperate "governments" have held power...if I remember right they've gone through four constitutions in 60 years. :eek:

Da Silva took the chance that this might leak out, in an attempt to grease the wheels a bit. It might not have been ethical, but I doubt he had anything but the nations long-term interests at heart.

The real problem in Brazil is that the states recieve money from the federal government for various programs, but they always overspend due to local corruption, driving up the federal debt. This too has been a problem for most of this century, and was the main reason for the hyperinflation in the late 1980's

It's my guess Da Silva wanted certain leftist elements, who favor this deranged form of federalism, to look the other way while he enacted some reforms. Given the number and power of left-leaning parties in Brazil, he would have to gain SOME support from them to pass any such action.

A link, or perhaps two, that detail this scandal would be nice (preferably not in Portugese :p ), because the key element of corruption isn't at the federal level, it's at the state level, and it's been a goal of the federal government to reduce that corruption for over 25 years...with no luck.

Da Silva gambled, and lost...it happens.

Well, I've actually been reading up on Brazil lately, (I RP Brazil in another forum, and I've been reading up on it for my Political Science class as well.)

While I won't excuse the actions of Da Silva, the number and diversity of the parties in the Brazilian legislative bodies makes it nearly impossible to get anything accomplished. This has been a problem for Brazil for most of the 20th century, and is part of the reason why so many seperate "governments" have held power...if I remember right they've gone through four constitutions in 60 years. :eek:

Da Silva took the chance that this might leak out, in an attempt to grease the wheels a bit. It might not have been ethical, but I doubt he had anything but the nations long-term interests at heart.

The real problem in Brazil is that the states recieve money from the federal government for various programs, but they always overspend due to local corruption, driving up the federal debt. This too has been a problem for most of this century, and was the main reason for the hyperinflation in the late 1980's

It's my guess Da Silva wanted certain leftist elements, who favor this deranged form of federalism, to look the other way while he enacted some reforms. Given the number and power of left-leaning parties in Brazil, he would have to gain SOME support from them to pass any such action.

A link, or perhaps two, that detail this scandal would be nice (preferably not in Portugese :p ), because the key element of corruption isn't at the federal level, it's at the state level, and it's been a goal of the federal government to reduce that corruption for over 25 years...with no luck.

Da Silva gambled, and lost...it happens.
Well, no direct links have been established to Lula da Silva...yet, although many say that it would be impossible for the President not be aware of such ocurrences.
Apparently, the bribes werent aimed only at leftist parties; some right-to-the-center parties were also recipients.
Corruption in Brazil has pervaded all levels of political power, including the federal one. President Collor de Mello was impeached in the 90´s amidst a huge corruption scandal.
I´ll provide a link, but isnt it quite strange that portuguese and brazilians take the time to learn english and americans and anglos in generally dont care to learn portuguese? :p
http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/2117.cfm

Well, no direct links have been established to Lula da Silva...yet, although many say that it would be impossible for the President not be aware of such ocurrences.

True, but maybe da Silva isn't/wasn't the true driving force of the executive branch?

Just a possibility.

Apparently, the bribes werent aimed only at leftist parties; some right-to-the-center parties were also recipients.

I noticed, odd though...if all these bribes were to get other parties to fall in line, then what, exactly, has been accomplished recently in Brazilian politics?

Corruption in Brazil has pervaded all levels of political power, including the federal one. President Collor de Mello was impeached in the 90´s amidst a huge corruption scandal.

Yeah, I'm learning quite a bit about that. It's pretty sad, and strange considering how smoothly Brazils transition into independece was (comparatively)

I´ll provide a link, but isnt it quite strange that portuguese and brazilians take the time to learn english and americans and anglos in generally dont care to learn portuguese? :p

True, but my high-school only offered German, Spanish, French and Latin (I took Spanish). I stopped taking language in college, but the one I went to offered Japanese, Russian, and also introductary courses in Arabic, Mandarin, Italian and Ancient Greek.

No Portugese though... :p

http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/2117.cfm

Nice link, I read through about half and skimmed the rest. I'll be sure to read the rest at some point today. :)

True, but maybe da Silva isn't/wasn't the true driving force of the executive branch?

Just a possibility.



I noticed, odd though...if all these bribes were to get other parties to fall in line, then what, exactly, has been accomplished recently in Brazilian politics?



Yeah, I'm learning quite a bit about that. It's pretty sad, and strange considering how smoothly Brazils transition into independece was (comparatively)

Up to this day, many brazilian intelectuals still blame the portuguese colonizers for the corruption personality trait that has become like a second skin to many of its politics.

True, but my high-school only offered German, Spanish, French and Latin (I took Spanish). I stopped taking language in college, but the one I went to offered Japanese, Russian, and also introductary courses in Arabic, Mandarin, Italian and Ancient Greek.

No Portugese though... :p



Nice link, I read through about half and skimmed the rest. I'll be sure to read the rest at some point today. :)
Up tp this day, many brazilian intelectuals blame the portuguese colonization for corruption being almost a second skin to an depressing number of Brazil´s politicians..

You're surprised that corrupt deals happen behind the scenes in a representative government? I'd be shocked if it didn't happen, no matter what the orientation of the government. The elected representative model is prone enough to deadlock that it almost has to occur in order to get anything done.

First of all, I wouldn't say the left is "pure of heart". Secondly, I've thought for a long time now that all political parties, when in power, are affraid to really push through thier policies completely. If they were able to have things completely thier way and things didn't improve or got worse. What then? Communist, Capitalists, social liberals, social conservatives, religously based governments none that I know of has ever reached or really tried in earnest to change policies completely to thier ideals.

I wouldn't blame corruption on either the left or right wing. In some countries/situations, corruption is common, in others it is rare. If one party is corrupt, their opposition is likely to be just as bad.

I wouldn't blame corruption on either the left or right wing. In some countries/situations, corruption is common, in others it is rare. If one party is corrupt, their opposition is likely to be just as bad.
Well, but in the particular case of Brazil, the electoral victory of the Labour Party presented great hopes for the general population that a new era of open and honest governement activity would begin...the Labour Party always had, while in opposition, a quite rabid stance on corruption, stating that if it got to power it would cleanse the political system...hubris,perhaps?

Well, but in the particular case of Brazil, the electoral victory of the Labour Party presented great hopes for the general population that a new era of open and honest governement activity would begin...the Labour Party always had, while in opposition, a quite rabid stance on corruption, stating that if it got to power it would cleanse the political system...hubris,perhaps?

That really sucks, damn dirty poiticans. I'd still say that it's not a left/right issue though, just that some systems are corrupt and it's difficult to remove that corruption. It's easy to think that corruption is just the fault of a few weak and greedy individuals, but once ingrained into a system it takes more than a few promises to remove.

*snip*

"More pure of heart" my hairy white ass. To me, the Left is nothing more than a band of looters and usurpers. None have any interest in allowing us to further our own lives; choosing instead to try to strip away this instinctive perogative in favor of a pastoral ideal that never existed.

The reason they're terrible with power is because their philosophical theory is so horrendous it's the only possible outcome. Invariably, however, people who fuck everything up when they're in power are decried by their comrades as "not being leftist." Likewise, whenever I attempt to deconstruct socialism on an ethical or epistemological level, my counterpart "isn't that kind of Socialist" or "never said that," even though I'm responding to the moral implications of his/her philosophy.

Between all the leftists who have come to power and bungled things horribly, and all the ones here who waffle incessantly in response to my criticisms, there might actually not be a Left. I've noticed they hardly ever want to identify themselves.

"More pure of heart" my hairy white ass. To me, the Left is nothing more than a band of looters and usurpers. None have any interest in allowing us to further our own lives; choosing instead to try to strip away this instinctive perogative in favor of a pastoral ideal that never existed.

The reason they're terrible with power is because their philosophical theory is so horrendous it's the only possible outcome. Invariably, however, people who fuck everything up when they're in power are decried by their comrades as "not being leftist." Likewise, whenever I attempt to deconstruct socialism on an ethical or epistemological level, my counterpart "isn't that kind of Socialist" or "never said that," even though I'm responding to the moral implications of his/her philosophy.

Between all the leftists who have come to power and bungled things horribly, and all the ones here who waffle incessantly in response to my criticisms, there might actually not be a Left. I've noticed they hardly ever want to identify themselves.
The "pastoral idea" thing would be more in line with consevative utopia od a Golden Age prior to the French Revolution...but i see where you are coming and i agree.

"More pure of heart" my hairy white ass. To me, the Left is nothing more than a band of looters and usurpers. None have any interest in allowing us to further our own lives; choosing instead to try to strip away this instinctive perogative in favor of a pastoral ideal that never existed.

The reason they're terrible with power is because their philosophical theory is so horrendous it's the only possible outcome. Invariably, however, people who fuck everything up when they're in power are decried by their comrades as "not being leftist." Likewise, whenever I attempt to deconstruct socialism on an ethical or epistemological level, my counterpart "isn't that kind of Socialist" or "never said that," even though I'm responding to the moral implications of his/her philosophy.

Between all the leftists who have come to power and bungled things horribly, and all the ones here who waffle incessantly in response to my criticisms, there might actually not be a Left. I've noticed they hardly ever want to identify themselves.

And I guess that the fact that right wing philosophy in general is centred on individual gain at the expense of others explains why right wing leaders have never delivered anything but privilege to themselves and a small elite. Corruption goes both ways.

And I guess that the fact that right wing philosophy in general is centred on individual gain at the expense of others explains why right wing leaders have never delivered anything but privilege to themselves and a small elite. Corruption goes both ways.
Right wing philosophy isnt in general centered on individual gain...european conservantism is much more focused on social cohesion and even the redidtribution of wealth, in the line of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Right wing philosophy isnt in general centered on individual gain...european conservantism is much more focused on social cohesion and even the redidtribution of wealth, in the line of the Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church.

If it involves social redistribution, it's probably a case of the terms "right" and "left" being a bit simplistic. However the social cohesion aspect is true, usually at the expense of anyone that doesn't fit the stereotype of somoene belonging to that society.

If it involves social redistribution, it's probably a case of the terms "right" and "left" being a bit simplistic. However the social cohesion aspect is true, usually at the expense of anyone that doesn't fit the stereotype of somoene belonging to that society.
Actually i meant social cohesion as in seting up a corporativist economic system where Labor and Capital are considered equal partners in the life of the nation and not bitter enemies...but still, thats a utopia too.

Actually i meant social cohesion as in seting up a corporativist economic system where Labor and Capital are considered equal partners in the life of the nation and not bitter enemies...but still, thats a utopia too.

Oh... yes, sounds like a utopia. Despite the apparent commyhood given by my political compass score, I tend to think that the left and right are both on the wrong track. The extremes of communism and libertarianism are both basically unachievable utopias...

Oh... yes, sounds like a utopia. Despite the apparent commyhood given by my political compass score, I tend to think that the left and right are both on the wrong track. The extremes of communism and libertarianism are both basically unachievable utopias...
well, corporativism was indeed the state-sponsered political regime of my country, Portugal, from 1933 to 1974.. strikes and closing of plants by capitalists wasnt allowed...but then again, my country was a dictatorship at the time.

And I guess that the fact that right wing philosophy in general is centred on individual gain at the expense of others explains why right wing leaders have never delivered anything but privilege to themselves and a small elite. Corruption goes both ways.
I have to date seen nothing that proves that an individual gain, by definition, always occurs "at someone else's expense." Its funny to me in a way, because it seems that the Left's strategy to keep people from doing things at the expense of others is to have everyone do everything at the expense of others. It tells us on one hand that capitalists are evil becaue they rely solely on the labor of others, then in the next breath they say that it's morally acceptable to rely on the labor of others. Which is it?

...And people wonder why Leftist policies don't work in the real world. I wonder why. Contradictions may exist on paper or in [false] theory, but they never exist in and cannot possibly be rationally applied to the real world.

No, it sells out to get in power