NYT Editorial: What’s Left of the Latin Left
[N.B. I had such high hopes for Chavez. Sadly, he is fast becoming a caricature of himself. If he doesn’t learn how to mix a little statesmenship with his bravado, he will turn off even the left.]
Ever since Hugo Chávez won Venezuela’s presidency and began presenting himself as a regional leader, the Bush administration has been proclaiming that he would push Latin America back to the left. But the left has been losing ground in recent elections, and there are signs that just being associated in voters’ minds with Mr. Chávez is a liability.
For a time, Mr. Chávez’s influence seemed powerful. In 2002, Ecuador elected Lucio Gutiérrez, another military populist, but later deposed him over an unconstitutional power grab. President Evo Morales of Bolivia is a radical populist who leans heavily on Mr. Chávez for advice, oil and money.
But in Peru, Alan GarcÃa defeated Ollanta Humala, a self-proclaimed Chávez acolyte and particularly frightening demagogue, after framing the choice as “Chávez or Peru.†The Mexican election is still being contested, but there is little doubt it got so close after Felipe Calderón unfairly accused his opponent Andrés Manuel López Obrador of being an aspiring Chávez.
In Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Costa Rica and other countries where the presidents are moderate social democrats, they have more in common with their center-right than with Mr. Chávez.
This is hardly what the left used to be in Latin America. In fact, Latin America has never been more centrist and pragmatic. The only voters who have chosen radicals live in perpetually ill-governed nations where the mainstream has failed them.
The Bush administration, whose clumsy opposition to Mr. Chávez played into his hands, has learned from its mistakes. It has handled Bolivia carefully and enjoys good relations with most of the moderate leaders.
One reason for Mr. Chávez’s failure to ignite a leftist revolution may be that his prominence has little to do with his policies. The high price of oil allows him to spend freely at home and to buy gratitude abroad by selling oil cheaply and on credit.
His very personal defiance of President Bush is his other attraction. That draws a stream of ideological tourists to Caracas. But as Jorge Castañeda, Mexico’s former foreign minister, points out, if they really wanted to support someone helping the poor, they would go to Chile.
This entry was posted on Monday, July 31st, 2006 at 1:52 PM and filed under Articles. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.
2 Responses to “NYT Editorial: What’s Left of the Latin Left”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
this is typical – nothing ground breaking here…the “liberal” NY Times has been white-washing our crimes in Latin America and carrying water for a corrupt foriegn policy for decades – get news about Chavez and the rest of our neighbors to the south from Democracy Now or other news sources that don’t rely on corporate ad dollars for their paychecks
Posted on 31-Jul-06 at 2:11 pm | PermalinkMike:
I didn’t realize we could use other editors’ posts to plug our own! LOL. It certainly is a novel idea: perhaps I should try it! LOL.
Peace.
Posted on 03-Aug-06 at 8:13 am | Permalink