s0ykaf [he/him]

  • 0 Posts
  • 63 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: December 23rd, 2020

help-circle


  • that last part is so true lmao

    when these evangelical leaders were reaching their peak, back in late 00’s/early 10’s, the PT decided to support rather than to fight them, in the hopes that they would get electoral support (which they even did, for a time; but like any reactionary opportunist, those leaders soon turned their back on the party)





  • lula did have 10 million more votes from catholics, whereas bolsonaro was up by 14 million with evangelicals

    but it’s a tricky stat: the most catholic regions in the country are the south and northeast, and while the first one voted firmly for the right, the second basically pushed lula to his win, with crazy percentages like over 76% of the votes in piauí

    so, two catholic regions voting in completely different ways. my take is that it’s not really that catholics support lula, as much as northeasterners do (for very material, concrete reasons - historically the poorest region in the country, but whose conditions improved massively under lula I and II), and they just happen to be very catholic





  • Maybe it’s that we made the Internet so full of disinformation that everyone is just automatically refusing to listen to others, maybe we have created a social group that just assumes they are more educated than everyone else cause they read some stuff in the internet.

    i’ve always thought the decline of capitalism, or even just the accumulation of its downturns, had the consequence of people trusting authorities less than they used to, and that scientists just get thrown in the same bag (“people who mess with this convoluted stuff as if they know what they’re doing and just keep making my life worse”)






  • Ahktually, Lula had a much more radical discourse during the 70s and 80s

    he did, and yet he was from the PT wing that was competing against the more socialist wing. and lula’s discourse has always been more radical than his actions, even today

    In 1989, he got the support of the Socialist Party, the Communist Party of Brazil

    the socialist party had an ok program, but pcdob was already a joke tbh, despite their program

    it’s funny, but while we like to say words have meaning, they seemly don’t when it comes to brazilian political parties

    in the second round basically everyone on the left supported him

    that is not surprising, is it? he was pitted against collor. second rounds are an entirely different story

    the actual leftish choice in 1989 was brizola (who correctly said, in the 90s, that lula and FHC were in the same place politically, except one came from below and the other, from above), not lula, but sadly he fell 1 or 2 points short of going to the second round. that one was an actual socdem, actually willing to do reforms with the people behind him, unlike lula, who was more in the realm of “ya’ll be quiet and let me do my thing”

    In 2002 he did receive the support of basically every leftist party in Brazil with exception of the trotskyists and the rival socdem party that I believe was the Vargas party, which is like Brazilian Peronism.

    he did! and then he turned his back on us, starting with the “letter to the brazilian people” which was written precisely to tell the market he wasn’t going to mess with the system, and then getting his first big win in government: a right-leaning pension reform, which would fuck over so many workers that some people in the party still decided to vote against it (resulting in their highly publicized expulsion and later founding of psol)

    Now personally, I don’t know Lula da Silva in Real-Life but he did say this about communists: And once he called Bolsonaro or someone else a stalinist but then he corrected himself and change it to nazist or something like that, lol.

    in the 80s he also called brazilian communists “know-it-alls” who didn’t really understand reality (basically usual socdem discourse: “it would be so cool, but unfortunately it wouldn’t work in practice”)

    we really shouldn’t be paying too much attention to lula’s words tbh, except for stuff like defending palestine where words actually have an effect

    communists have one good thing they can count on in Lula’s government, which is that he’s not going to do like the SPD and hunt down communists

    only because we are not a threat. in the 2013 protests, where the anarchists and autonomists in general were very present, just before the right wing took the whole thing over, haddad and dilma went haywire on people. they actually supported our fash police beating them up and “bringing order”, instead of using that opportunity to enact reforms. even in 2022, just after lula was elected, i saw people from the party saying leftists who decided to protest during this government were “NGO-funded, fifth column troublemakers” who should be put in their place by the police. when push comes to shove, the PT has always turned to the bourgeois order than to workers and students - which isn’t even socdem behavior, just straight up liberalism

    By the way, I don’t know how popular his minister of economy is, but I don’t think he’s that popular. He could win a presidential election simply because the right is so bad at winning presidential elections without cheating. I saw something on Twitter about the Brazilian Senate ending re-election and returning to the old system, which is similar to the Mexican/Paraguayan system of one term, but with 5 years to govern. And I also thought that Lula’s real successor was that Boulos guy.

    don’t you feel like haddad has been more impactful than lula? which is pretty sad, because his impact is actually bad - there are reasons why he’s complimented by so many bankers, none of them are good

    boulos does look like lula 2.0

    edit: btw, my dad was a mayor from the PT once (still in the party, just not running for seats anymore - at least that i know of) and he’s as close to an american senior democrat as i can think of, which admittedly might make me more cynical than average about the party