Bad Times for Brazil

Brazil's Bolsonaro celebrates - but should Brazilians be celebrating?

One of the planet's largest, most multiethnic democracies will be governed by a racist, homophobic, misogynist with an admiration for dictators...and it's not the United States.

It's mind-boggling that a man who insults black and indigenous people could be elected president of a nation with a black and indigenous majority. But it's no more crazy than that a man who disparages women could be elected by a nation with a female majority.

Both of these things - as well as newly-elected Brazilian Pres. Jair Bolsonaro's endorsements of dictatorship and mass executions - should disqualify him from being president of anything but a neo-Nazi encampment in northwest Idaho.

Bolsonaro's presidency - part of an authoritarian wave across Latin America - will test Brazil's young and feeble democracy, already under huge strain because one former president is in prison for corruption and many other politicians are also under suspicion.

Brazil is far from the only nation in the region slipping into authoritarianism, or in danger of it. Venezuela and Nicaragua are ruled by self-described socialists who are really just authoritarians with plans for becoming presidents for life. Bolivia's Evo Morales appears to want to do the same thing. Many observers believe that Mexico's newly elected president, a leftist populist known as Amlo, believes more in himself than in democratic institutions. And Amlo will also enjoy majority support in Congress, giving him vast powers to reshape Mexico's institutions.

But if Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega is brutal and Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro is incompetent and brutal, both have at least preserved the forms of democracy in their nations. Bolsonaro, judging by his admiration for dictatorship, doesn't appear likely to do the same if he manages to consolidate power in Brazil.

Just a few decades ago, Latin America was emerging from a dark period of military strongmen into democracy. Today, many nations are electing authoritarians. Latin American democracy may have no more than a brief, passing phase.

Bolsonaro's victory is a massive tragedy for the environment, in a nation which is steward for most of the Amazon rainforest. And it will be a long-term tragedy for human rights and many young lives if Bolsonaro follows thru with his crackdown against criminals and popularizes gun ownership - a policy which has multiplied the U.S.'s homicide rate.

Perhaps Latin America's democracies suffered from a fatal error at birth by adopting presidential rather than parliamentary systems. In parliamentary systems the leader, or prime minister, must work his way up through the ranks, making compromises along the way. That process might produce predominantly mediocre, middling sorts of personalities. But, at least, the populists and extremists usually get filtered out.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Latin American Democracy in Retreat

Authoritarian Venezuelan
Pres. Nicolas Maduro.

In the mid-2000s, Colombia's popular and hard-right Pres. Alvaro Uribe wanted to run for a third consecutive term. But the Constitutional Court ruled against the idea, saving Colombia's fragile democratic system from falling into the grip of a strongman. Uribe instead selected his defense minister, Juan Manuel Santos, to run as his succesor. Santos won - but rebelled against his mentor, creating a sort of alternation of powers.

Similarly, in Ecuador Pres. Rafael Correa tried to maintain power by selecting his own succesor. But that man, Lenin Moreno, also rebelled against his mentor, saving Ecuador's instituations from becoming puppets of a strongman.

But Argentina did appear to be falling victim to a personality cult under the corrupt Kirchner dynasty - until Argentineans finally voted against them and elected Pres. Mauricio Macri, who is trying to clean up the Kirchners' mess.

Nicaragua's authoritarian president-for-life Daniel Ortega
and his wife, who is also his vice president.

Other Latin nations, however, have been less fortunate. In Bolivia, Nicaragua and, most notoriously, Venezuela, leftist leaders are turning themselves into presidents for life, sometimes with disastrous results in corruption, human welfare and the economy.

Now, some fear that Mexican president-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador, known as AMLO, a
leftist populist admirer of Cuba's ex-dictator Fidel Castro who will have few checks on his power and who appears to believe more in himself than in democratic institutions, will weaken Mexican democracy, which has just suffered through a presidential term marred by flagrant corruption and is under strain from chronic drug violence.

Jair Bolsanero, potential
dictator of Brazil?

But now the greatest threats to Latin democracy are coming from Washington D.C., where a leader
 who patently does not believe in democracy is setting a deplorable example for nations which once looked to the U.S. for democratic guidance, and Brazil, which is about to elect a racist, homophobic misogenist and unapologetic admirer of military dictatorship, as president.

Brazil's importance can hardly be exaggerated. It is the largest nation in Latin America and the world's fourth-largest democracy. It is also the protector - if it can be called that - of the Amazon, one of the planet's treasures of biodiversity and storehouse of carbon dioxide. And if virtual Brazilian Pres. Jair Bolsonaro is even more extreme than Trump, Brazil's institutions are much weaker.

It's all enough to make one wonder whether Latin America (and even the planet's) brief experiment with liberal democracy was only that, and experiment, which is failing.








By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

A Profile in Courage from Next Door

Not a 'yes woman.' Venezuelan Attorney General Luisa Ortega.

Look at authoritarian states around the world, from Belarus to Russia to Turkey to Egypt and you'll see not only a near-dictator, but also a crowd of yes-men (and women) around him eager to praise every decree and pronuncement, no matter how offensive.

That's why the stands taken by Luisa Ortega, the attorney general of increasingly authoritarian Venezuela, are so impressive.

Generally, in authoritarian regimes, those surrounding the leader support him because the leader rewards loyal allies, while those who oppose him get fired or worse.

But Ortega has defied that calculation.

Ortega called the decision by the Supreme Court - packed with government loyalists - to dissolve the

Wannabe dictator Nicolas Maduro.

oppposition-controlled parliament and assume its powers "a violation of the constitutional order." That's a bit of an understatement, but good for her, anyway. In the face of her opinion and international criticism, the court reversed itself, although it continues to annul the parliament's laws one by one.

Ortega has also declined to prosecute anti-government protesters, causing the government to send them to military courts, an evident violation of the Constitution.

Organization of American States Secretary General Luis Almagro pointed out that trying civilians in military courts was done by Latin America's right-wing dictators.

She has also accused the Maduro government of lawbreaking and even of killing at least one protester.

Ortega is no right-wing anti-government fanatic, but leftie loyalist to the deceased Pres. Hugo Chávez.

And Ortega called Pres. Nicolas Maduro's plan to convoke a constitutional convention as "unnecessary" and risky, and charged that the delegates chosen to rewrite the Constitution would not be representative of Venezuelans, who overwhelmingly oppose Pres. Maduro.

Others have pointed out that Maduro's constitutional convention idea is a naked power grab.

We can count on at least one thing: under the new Constitution Ortega won't have a government job.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Venexit

Venezuelan Pres. Nicolas Maduro has become increasingly dictatorial.

So, you're self-proclaimed socialist 'revolution' is being criticized harshly as undemocratic by the head of an international organization you belong to.

And for good reason: After all, you've invented obstacles to block a recall referendum to which your Constitution gives citizens a right.

And you've used the Supreme Court - which you recently packed with your supporters - to annul every law issued by the opposition-dominated Parliament.

And you've even suspended regional elections, which your government would be sure to lose.

Not satisfied with all of that, you've shut down and banned critical media.

So, it's perfectly understandable, if still unjustifiable, that Venezuelan Pres. Nicolas Maduro intends to withdraw his nation from the Organization of American States (OAS), whose leader has strongly criticized Maduro's trampling of democratic institutions.

Besides his authoritarianism, Maduro has been an
incompetent ruler.

The Venezuelan government's flight from well-founded criticism marks the sad end of one of Latin America's oldest democracies. And Venezuela's descent into authoritarianism and violent repression of government opponents creates many potential problems for Colombia, beginning with the economic and political refugees now flooding across the border.

Authoritarian states are more likely than democracies to enter violent confrontations, and Colombia and Venezuela have a history of tensions, over territory, smuggling, migration and the activities of illegal organizations.

And the situation is worsened by Venezuela's economic tailspin, which could drive Maduro to seek a scapegoat - who could be Colombia.

Unfortunately, Venezuela's pending withdrawal from the OAS will only confirm its path toward dictatorship.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Trumping Latin Democracies

Donald Trump, would-be strongman.

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Venezuelan Pres. Nicolas Maduro may
seem like polar opposites. One is a wealthy conservative, the other a leftist who started out as a bus driver.

The two, however, do have at least one characteristic in common: Authoritarianism.

At the last U.S. presidential debate, Trump told Democrat Hillary Clinton that if he were president, she'd "be in jail," because of her mishandling of government e-mails. Evidently, Trump had forgotten that imprisoning people is the job of judges and prosecutors, not of presidents - at least in a democracy.

Nicolas Maduro, Venezuela's
authoritarian president.

But Trump might find a model in Maduro, whose government has imprisoned numerous opponents, most prominently Leopoldo Lopez, an ex-mayor and potential presidential candidate, whose trial was called a farce by many human rights organizations. Lopez is serving a 14 year prison term for supposedly inciting protests using subliminal signals.

Not satisfied with jailing opponents, the deeply unpopular Maduro has also used his puppet Supreme Court to declare Parliament, where the opposition has a majority, 'unconstitutional' and unable to issue legislation. Maduro also announced that he will instruct the Supreme Court to approve the national budget, even tho the Constitution explicits gives this job to Parliament.

Among Maduro's long list of authoritan, anti-constitutional actions is also using his puppet Electoral Council to put obstacle after obstacle in the way of a recall referendum the opposition wants to organize against him - another right provided in Venezuela's Constitution. And Maduro's government recently said that it won't hold governor and regional legislative elections this year because it can't afford to - this in an oil-soaked nation which throws billions of dollars away each year on corruption and giving away gasoline.

"The priority isn't to hold elections," Maduro said. "What is the country's priority? Fulfill the whim of the oligarchy or recover the economy?"

Leopold Lopez,
Maduro's political prisoner.

Under Maduro's incompetent mishandling, Venezuela's economy is sinking, it has the world's highest inflation rate and shortages of basic goods like sugar, flour, toilet paper and medicines. It also has one of the world's highest homicide rates.

What Venezuela needs most are elections, to throw out Maduro and his allies and restore sanity. understandably, Maduro doesn't want to permit votes he knows he'd lose.

Sadly, the story is not so different in nations like Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua, where leftist leaders have entrenched themselves and are trying to become presidents-for-life.

In that sense, Brazil and Guatemala, both embroiled in corruption scandals, should be admired. There, at least, the democratic institutions have had the resiliency to remove flawed presidents and investigate their alleged misdeeds.

Would the U.S.'s own institutions be strong enough to withstand a President Trump?

Hopefully, we'll never have to find out.

Check out the excellent NY Times story about this.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

The Downfall of Democracies

University students from Venezuela protest crime, shortages and restrictions on free speech in their country this afternoon in front of Los Andes University in Bogotá.

Across the territory of the old Soviet Union, parts of Africa and right next door in Venezuela, democracy is being dismantled.

I know only the general outlines of what's going on in Asia and Africa, where numerous leaders, once elected, manipulate the rules to guarantee themselves perpetual reelection. And they use temporary majorities to issue laws giving themselves control of the legal system and repressing critical media.

But it's particularly sad for me to watch this happening next door in Venezuela, where I lived there for several years, and particularly because it's a nation with such tremendous potential, in ever way.

When Hugo Chavez was elected in 1998, many of us saw in him a hope for a change from the often corrupt and incompetent leaders who had preceded him, who had largely ruled for the benefit of the small wealthy classes.

But Chavez replaced one style of disfunctional government for another, even worse one. He eliminated checks and balances, used insult as political discourse and converted Venezuela's tremendous wealth into a huge machine for buying supporters and elections. Meanwhile, the government of Chavez and his hand-picked successor Maduro threatened private media and made it more and more difficult for independent newspapers and television to operate.

Venezuelan opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez
being arrested.

At the same time, the government's increasing attempts to control the economy only distorted it, shutting down businesses and causing shortages of basics such as milk and toilet paper. And - perhaps because of the leaders' aggressive, profane rhetoric, their creation of civilian militias, the corruption and lack of rule of law - or all of these things - violent crime skyrocketed.

A Ukranian protester throws a bomb.

Still, some elements of an open society survived, including some independent media and competitive elections - at least in some areas.

Meanwhile, naturally, students, the middle class and others felt increasingly frustrated by the government's steady strangulation of basic liberties. The Cuba-style shortages of basic goods in what should be one of the world's wealthiest nations seem to have been the needle which broke the camel's back. Three weeks ago, Venezuela erupted in protests.

A Venezuelan protester demands freedom of speech.

Such difficulties make no sense in what, by all rights, should be the region's wealthiest, most prosperous nation. It's not for nothing that Venezuela, an OPEC member, has been compared to Saudi Arabia.

But, rather than recognizing that his nation's heading down the wrong path, Pres. Maduro is using the protests as an excuse to increase authoritarianism. An opposition leader was arrested on evidently invented charges and sent to 'court' on a military base. Maduro yanked a Colombian news channel off of the cable TV systems without benefit of any sort of hearing or appeal process. And reporters in western Venezuela report that their cell phone service has been cut. Newspapers were already struggling with a lack of paper to print on.

Maduro is now threatening to expel CNN from the country "for making it appear that Venezuela is having a civil war." Watchers and readers can draw their own conclusions.

Venezuelan authorities are trying to divert the blame for their nation's multiple crisis by accusing Colombia and the United States - the perpetual whipping boys - of being behind the troubles. It's patently untrue. The sources of Venezuela's troubles are right at home: a wrecked economy, shortages of basic goods, galloping inflation, soaring crime and an increasingly authoritarian government. (In fact, Venezuela lives off of the U.S., which buys much of Venezuela's petroleum and sells it much of what Venezuela imports.)

In the recent protests six people have been killed, including a beauty queen and university student shot in the head after participating in an anti-government protest march.

But I'm not optimistic that these budding dictators will be forced out soon. It's tragic but true that both strongmen and full-fledged dictators have shown real staying power. Look at Chavez himself - and his succesor Maduro - as well as Russia's Putin and the leaders of Syria, Belarus and many of those ex-Soviet states.

I can't help observing the embarrasing behavior of some lefties, such as the folks at Democracy Now! You'd think that a program with a name like that would oppose autocratic strongmen, especially those which are strangling press freedoms. But the message I get from DN's coverage of the violence in Ukraine and Venezuela is that the bad guys here are the protesters, who are quasi-fascists pretending to be democrats, and that the real demon behind them is - as always - the United States, which is pulling the strings. 

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Chavéz's Latest Re-Re-Re-Reelection

Chavez's re-re-reelection victory in Venezuela is no surprise.

Chavez is undoubtedly popular, even after 14 years in power. But it's still an open question whether he would have won reelection yet again if not for his ability to convert the whole mechanism of government into a Chavez campaign machine.

I lived in Venezuela during several years of Chavez's presidency, and I left convinced that he wasn't doing much that was constructive in the long term for his country. Another six years of Chavez, which would total 20 years of Chavez presidency, will be disastrous for Venezuela's economy and democratic institutions. Chavez already dominates the judiciary, bureaucracy and legislature. The independent media has been severely weakened. And the state has expanded its control over more and more of the economy. All of these damaging trends will likely only increase.

But Chavez may very well not complete this latest six-year term, since there are persistent questions about his health. And if Chavez dies or is unable to rule, no clear succesor exists to govern the country.

In the meantime, however, Chavez's victory means continuity, if not perhaps stability, in Colombian-Venezuelan relations. It also improves prospects for Colombia's negotiations now just beginning with the FARC guerrillas, where Chavez can be a key mediator.

But all of this depends on Chavez's health holding up, and that's the great unknown.

Incidentally, Chavez idolizes revolutionary leader Simón Bolívar, who famously said this:


"...nothing is so dangerous as allowing the same person to remain in power a long time. The people become accustomed to obeying him, and he becomes accustomed to commanding them, from which comes usurpation and tyranny."

"The perpetuation of authority in the same individual has frequently been the end of democratic governments."

Chavez loves to quote Bolívar, but I've never heard him repeat those lines, for some reason.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours

Venezuela's Continuing Slide Toward Dictatorship

Red all over, and ready to write laws.

Venezuela's National Assembly just voted itself into irrelevency by giving Pres. Chavez the power to rule by decree for 18 months over wide areas of national life. Chavez has already turned the courts into puppets,  nationalized large parts of the country's economy and intimidated or shut down much of the once-independent media.

Chavez, who has also eliminated his own term limits, was happy to rule through the National Assembly as long as nearly all of its members were his yes-men and women. But in recent elections, opponents got about half of the votes and Chavez's allies held onto only a tiny majority in the assembly.

All for one and all for Chavez. Chavez's sort of parliament. 

For Chavez, evidently, an Assembly with a vigorous opposition had the potential to be troublesome, so better to rule alone, using as an excuse the country's disastrous flooding. Is that any justification to rule by decree for 18 months in areas such as finance and telecomunnications? Or, might this be a way to seize even more power, as his domestic troubles grow.

Unfortunately, Chavez's critics leap to compare him to Adolf Hitler, the arch-evil. Chavez is bad, but he's still a long way from Hitler, and such arguments give the professional Chavez apologists an opening to defend the man as being 'well, not so bad.'

For Colombia, this is worrisome. Chavez is an unstable ideologue, who seems to have a religious belief in a bizarre form of socialism and in himself as saviour. He thrives by stirring up nationalism against 'foreign threats' (read, 'Colombia'). He's also been buying weapons and apparently arming and financing Colombia's leftist guerrillas. With more power and less oversight for Chavez, those tendencies might accelerate.

By Mike Ceaser, of Bogotá Bike Tours