Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: "We're the land of the future, and we always will be"
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
The economic growth of Brazil has stalled, and the other BRICS aren't doing that well either. The Guardian had an article about this today.
Sometimes I feel that there is a threshold somewhere. Countries can grow to the level where Brazil is now, but also Turkey, Indonesia, Mexico … but somehow it stalls before they can become real developed countries.
Why would that be? Or am I wrong?
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I suppose you'd have to look for counter-examples. South Korea is the most obvious one, but you might also consider Finland and Ireland, and possibly Portugal. In the middle of the last century they were all pretty poor and underdeveloped.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet: I suppose you'd have to look for counter-examples. South Korea is the most obvious one, but you might also consider Finland and Ireland, and possibly Portugal. In the middle of the last century they were all pretty poor and underdeveloped.
Also Israel but they have a LOT of help in the form of US $$$$$.
-------------------- This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote: Arethosemyfeet: I suppose you'd have to look for counter-examples. South Korea is the most obvious one
Yes, that's a good one. I think that to South Korea you could also add Japan.
My guess is that they managed to develop when there was a need to make things, they had cheap labour, and very importantly: most of the profit stayed in the country. I'm not sure if it would be possible to do the same thing now. Other countries like Thailand or Malaysia haven't really be able to follow them.
To Portugal I guess you could add some Eastern European countries that have reached more or less the same level through EU membership (Estonia? Czech Republic?)
Other interesting cases are Chile, and perhaps to a lesser level Ecuador. I think that these countries have their small size going for them (Chile is loooong but it doesn't have that many inhabitants). Maybe that's what is keeping countries like Brazil, Mexico or Indonesia back, that they're simply too big? [ 27. March 2016, 16:57: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I believe this is a well-known phenomenon which even has its own "economics name" - the "middle-income trap". It seems that in such countries wages are high enough to leave the economy vulnerable to overseas competition from low-wage countries, but the amount of high-tech / high capital infrastructure is not enough to compete with rich countries in their areas of economic strength.
Here is one view on it
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by LeRoc:
Sometimes I feel that there is a threshold somewhere. Countries can grow to the level where Brazil is now, but also Turkey, Indonesia, Mexico; but somehow it stalls before they can become real developed countries.
Why would that be? Or am I wrong?
Is it the case that the only "real developed countries" are the Western European democracies and their former colonies ?
Seems to me that what the article is hinting at is the idea that a Western economy requires a Western culture. Social capital, executive government that is subject to the legal system, the infrastructure of human rights & legal freedoms which is part of what we mean by "democracy".
-------------------- Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by LeRoc: Other interesting cases are Chile, and perhaps to a lesser level Ecuador. I think that these countries have their small size going for them (Chile is loooong but it doesn't have that many inhabitants). Maybe that's what is keeping countries like Brazil, Mexico or Indonesia back, that they're simply too big?
My un-academic hunch is that the optimal size of s country is around 10 million inhabitants. At this level, it has all the economies of scale a country will need in terms of governance (although not necessarily national defence), but is not yet large enough to see its polity start getting bogged down by the over-professionalism of special interest groups which start to leech out the state as a vehicle for personal gain.
Countries like Brazil, Nigeria and the United States are simply too large to hold together without an inefficient process of power brokering which makes corruption (although you may wish to call it by a variety of legal names) an integral part of governance.
Of course, you may get beyond the 10 million by distributing power efficiently to lower levels of government (like Germany does with its Länder, but not the UK or France).
-------------------- ... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by molopata: My un-academic hunch is that the optimal size of s country is around 10 million inhabitants. At this level, it has all the economies of scale a country will need in terms of governance (although not necessarily national defence), but is not yet large enough to see its polity start getting bogged down by the over-professionalism of special interest groups which start to leech out the state as a vehicle for personal gain.
I think you are vastly underestimating the potential for corruption in small populations.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Russ: quote: Originally posted by LeRoc: Sometimes I feel that there is a threshold somewhere. Countries can grow to the level where Brazil is now, but also Turkey, Indonesia, Mexico; but somehow it stalls before they can become real developed countries.
Why would that be? Or am I wrong?
Is it the case that the only "real developed countries" are the Western European democracies and their former colonies?
Only if you can think of some reason why the aforementioned nations of Japan and South Korea aren't "real developed countries". It also begs the question of why so many of the former colonies of Western European nations (a lot of them weren't actually democracies when they had colonies) aren't "real developed countries". I'd say the correlation between having your resources looted by a foreign overlord and economic development is either coincidental or negative. Three of the four nations LeRoc mentioned as having trouble with economic development are former European colonies, so if that's all it takes why are Brazil, Indonesia, and Mexico having difficulties?
-------------------- Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Crœsos: quote: Originally posted by Russ: Is it the case that the only "real developed countries" are the Western European democracies and their former colonies?
Only if you can think of some reason why the aforementioned nations of Japan and South Korea aren't "real developed countries".
It also begs the question of why so many of the former colonies of Western European nations (a lot of them weren't actually democracies when they had colonies) aren't "real developed countries".
Being a former colony is clearly not sufficient. But those former British colonies which are inhabited more by the descendants of the colonisers than by the descendants of the colonised indigenous peoples are clearly amongst the "real developed countries". Such countries might be said to be culturally but not geographically European ?
Do Qatar and Kuwait count as being really developed ? Or will they become so when enough of the oil wealth has been spent on physical, social and cultural infrastructure ?
Japan is perhaps the most economically successful of the non-European states. To what do you attribute this, if not to a deliberate decision to "westernize" ?
-------------------- Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by molopata: Countries like Brazil, Nigeria and the United States are simply too large to hold together without an inefficient process of power brokering which makes corruption (although you may wish to call it by a variety of legal names) an integral part of governance.
Except that the US is the most wealthy and powerful nation in the world. Brazil is the wealthiest nation in South America, although middling when normalized per capita. Nigeria is wealthy (largely due to oil) and huge in terms of population in Africa, and staggeringly corrupt.
There doesn't seem a simple message here.
-------------------- mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by mdijon: quote: Originally posted by molopata: Countries like Brazil, Nigeria and the United States are simply too large to hold together without an inefficient process of power brokering which makes corruption (although you may wish to call it by a variety of legal names) an integral part of governance.
Except that the US is the most wealthy and powerful nation in the world. Brazil is the wealthiest nation in South America, although middling when normalized per capita. Nigeria is wealthy (largely due to oil) and huge in terms of population in Africa, and staggeringly corrupt.
There doesn't seem a simple message here.
Paradoxically, that probably is the simple message. Or in other words, it can all go horribly wrong, in many different ways, just as much as it can just get stuck. It's all a balancing act, surely, and what works now may not have worked then, etc.
-------------------- Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
I wonder how much effect the countries' religious beliefs have had? I do not know the answer to this, but maybe the 'cooler', more laid back approach of northern European countries, Australia an NZ, Costa Rica, Canada, USA - although religions are there very much to the fore, the constitution maintains a separation - cannot be overlooked, I think.
-------------------- I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SusanDoris: I wonder how much effect the countries' religious beliefs have had? I do not know the answer to this, but maybe the 'cooler', more laid back approach of northern European countries, Australia an NZ, Costa Rica, Canada, USA - although religions are there very much to the fore, the constitution maintains a separation - cannot be overlooked, I think.
I don't think one should ignore anything. But I suspect that thesis falls at the first hurdle, when considering early modern Europe. Religion then was very far from being laid-back, yet in whatever form, those countries continued to develop. Also, Weimar Germany was probably more laid-back in terms of religion than any other country at the time, yet look at what happened there. There are of course, other factors of greater importance at work in both examples, but that is rather the point.
-------------------- Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote: TurquoiseTastic: It seems that in such countries wages are high enough to leave the economy vulnerable to overseas competition from low-wage countries, but the amount of high-tech / high capital infrastructure is not enough to compete with rich countries in their areas of economic strength.
I'd need to find out more. For example, are the high-tech industries really what makes that much of a difference for a whole country? And what is for example the UK doing there what Brazil is not?
What I'm also wondering: would there be room for a lot of countries to enter this competition? Is the market big enough for that?
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Years ago I read a report about an anthropologist visiting one of the last hunter-gatherer tribes. He reports they worked about 25 hours a week, that took care of all needs - food, shelter, clothes - most of the day was spent enjoying life in community, the kids cared for by all not just the two parents.
Recently I was reading about a (persecuted by Western business interests who want to mine their land) aboriginal group who have no sense of ownership. When they go out gathering food, it's not for "me" but to bring home to the tribe and share - if little is found all get little, if much is found all enjoy much.
Sometimes I think our questions abut how to get more countries to become like the West are asking exactly the opposite of what we should be looking for - not how to get more people to work harder and collect more money so they can afford more of the luxuries that separate their lives from their neighbors, but how to get away from the Western style and live more aware that the wellbeing of all in the community is our own wellbeing. Even if that means we protect the land instead of mining it, and spend our hours together instead of buying TVs to watch alone.
Is it possible the Western pursuit of individual materialism is the cause of the corruption we protest? As Pogo said decades ago, the enemy is us.
(But how to go "backwards" to community when the western culture has taught everyone around you to focused on individual materialism? There's no one to build community with, when anyone you approach is looking for what they can get out of it for themselves to take away!)
The real corruption is in the value system we the west as a culture promote.
Those who pocket charitable donations for their own hidden bank accounts are reflecting the "the little people don't matter" values of the bosses who stop paying overtime by making the position salaried, and pocket the savings by giving themselves bonuses.
The materialist me first value system the west promotes is the problem. Leaders who accept that teaching and build their bank accounts instead of building their countries are just the symptom.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
[cross-posted - reply to LeRoc]
I'm just going off the VSI to Global Economic History which was recommended to me by a colleague. According to the author it's all about capital-to-labour ratios, and his answer to "what is the UK doing differently to Brazil" is "about 150 years head-start". He divides "rich countries" into 3 categories:
1. Britain - first industrialised country 2. "Standard model" catch-up: USA and Western Europe 3. "Big Push" catch-up: Japan
He also discusses why the standard model no longer works with particular reference to Latin America (essentially - you can't build up your domestic high-value industries without being out-competed by existing rich countries). This is why a "big push" a la Japan is necessary (massive government intervention to produce a "ready-made" high-value economy all at once) in his opinion, although this too may fail (Soviet Union, Maoist China). [ 28. March 2016, 16:01: Message edited by: TurquoiseTastic ]
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
That's a clever way of packaging the ideas that hadn't occurred to me before. Of course, genocidal mania, fabulous incompetence, corruption and paralyzing paranoia were substantial parts of the problem in the USSR and Maoist China. [ 28. March 2016, 17:00: Message edited by: mdijon ]
-------------------- mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi: quote: Originally posted by mdijon: quote: Originally posted by molopata: Countries like Brazil, Nigeria and the United States are simply too large to hold together without an inefficient process of power brokering which makes corruption (although you may wish to call it by a variety of legal names) an integral part of governance.
Except that the US is the most wealthy and powerful nation in the world. Brazil is the wealthiest nation in South America, although middling when normalized per capita. Nigeria is wealthy (largely due to oil) and huge in terms of population in Africa, and staggeringly corrupt.
There doesn't seem a simple message here.
Paradoxically, that probably is the simple message. Or in other words, it can all go horribly wrong, in many different ways, just as much as it can just get stuck. It's all a balancing act, surely, and what works now may not have worked then, etc.
Yes, that is kind of the message. Nigeria is country that should be wealthy on the basis of its available resources, but the way the resources are shared is outrageous. Much of the country (particularly the north) is stuck in abject poverty. As for the US, obviously it is a wealthy nation, but the lobbying industry in Washington is epic in proportions and the horse-trading around policies, constituencies (gerrymandering) and election campaigns and financing does not live up to the country's ideals of due process and equal opportunities. As a nation state, the US currently appears to be fatigued and unable to reinvent itself (I hope I'm wrong). Recent political developments (particularly in the Republican party) are an indicator that it's listing.
I think that the sheer size of these example countries is a very important factor in their failing ability to manage themselves efficiently.
-------------------- ... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by SusanDoris: I wonder how much effect the countries' religious beliefs have had? I do not know the answer to this, but maybe the 'cooler', more laid back approach of northern European countries, Australia an NZ, Costa Rica, Canada, USA - although religions are there very much to the fore, the constitution maintains a separation - cannot be overlooked, I think.
The big influential thesis (from Max Weber, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism) is that ascetic Protestantism (what we in Britain might call Puritanism) gave birth to the Protestant work ethic. He particularly credits early foreshadowings of the prosperity gospel.
The other big influential thesis in the area is that of the Anglican socialist Tawney (Religion and the Rise of Capitalism). He argued that the Protestant work ethic was responsible for the rise of capitalism in that it separated moral duties from economic duties, leading to the demise of social and political solidarity.
(Big influential thesis in the social sciences means an idea that people are still arguing against.)
-------------------- we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I find Protestantism per se a really unconvincing explanation for rapid development. Why should "prosperity gospel" inspire one to work hard? It seems equally likely to make one lie back and wait for God to dole out the good stuff. Anyway large segments of the 19C industrial West were Catholic (the Rhineland? France? Northern Italy?), to say nothing of 20C Japan.
However I am a bit more willing to listen to an argument about specific religious conditions in 18th C Britain, viz. there were a lot of middling-to-wealthy Nonconformists who experienced a "glass ceiling" from the Establishment and thus directed their considerable energies in an engineering direction.
However other factors were probably more important - obviously coal and iron were easily available, but there was also a thriving financial sector able to fund innovators, and wages were (I believe) relatively high making it more profitable to work with lots of machines rather than lots of labour.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic: Why should "prosperity gospel" inspire one to work hard? It seems equally likely to make one lie back and wait for God to dole out the good stuff.
I don't think puritanism and protestantism were all that close to the modern version of the prosperity gospel. There was much more of the "If a man will not work, he shall not eat" vibe.
The more modern prosperity gospel does seem to inspire some very non-productive approaches to wealth generation (e.g. spending inordinate periods of time in prayer and fasting for riches, giving rather credulous sums of money to preachers promising blessings in return etc.)
-------------------- mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
How far are the BRIC countries and similar subject to speculative bubbles? ISTM likely that if a country is bigged up as the next economic superpower, this encourages speculation based on blind optimism and 'I read it in a magazine', and thus becomes a self-defeating prophecy. Whereas countries like Chile and Estonia are small enough to slip under the speculative radar.
However that's based on It Stands To Reason rather than evidence.
-------------------- Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic: Why should "prosperity gospel" inspire one to work hard?
The idea was supposedly that if you worked hard and your effort was rewarded you knew you were being blessed by God and therefore among the elect. (I don't know how Weber accounts for Northern France: Jansenist tendencies and Huguenots I suspect.)
-------------------- we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
It seems we should be talking about what is going on in Brazil right now, seeing that the quote in the OP is a famous quote about Brazil and the OP either is in Brazil or has spent a lot of time there. There is a massive Petrobras scandal and ongoing economic stagnation.
Are Rousseff, da Silva, and the Worker's Party any more corrupt than any other major political party or center of power in Brazil right now or previous parties, governments, and movements in the past? Are the current and former president completely guilty as charged or is there at least some basis to their supporters' claims that they are being unfairly targeted, even if there was a lot of corruption among other members of their administration? It seems that the corruption is across the board. Are they guilty of mismanaging the economy or are they just the victim of falling commodity prices and declining demand from China? Would any other party or ruler do any better right now or be able to form a better functioning coalition? Usually, I think it is healthy for a democracy other parties to take power during massive scandals - or at least for another faction within the same party to take power. There needs to be accountability at the very top, even if the President herself is not guilty of a crime.
It is ironic that this combination of massive scandals and serious economic woes comes under the party that over a decade ago was being hailed for finally giving Brazil sustainable economic development coupled with economic justice. I don't see any other political movement in Brazil right now that seems any more likely to do this - but I admit that I do not know much about Brazil.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
We're just getting around in Canada to try to understand that, while being a wealthy country, significant segments of it are Third World. Many of the ingredients for the terrible conditions in the north and west are well know, we just don't have the will to do anything about them. It's racist here re indigenous peoples. Isn't it racist in many places? We leave the visible minorities in poverty and behind.
-------------------- Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety. \_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by LeRoc: quote: Arethosemyfeet: I suppose you'd have to look for counter-examples. South Korea is the most obvious one
Yes, that's a good one. I think that to South Korea you could also add Japan.
My guess is that they managed to develop when there was a need to make things, they had cheap labour, and very importantly: most of the profit stayed in the country.
It's worth noting that before the 'Japan the sick man of asia' meme, the main complaint was that Japan was running a mercantilist regime wrt the rest of the world.
The other thing both of those countries had was a really heavy emphasis on increasing the average level of education in each country.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Replying to a number of things here:
quote: Belle Ringer: The materialist me first value system the west promotes is the problem.
I do largely agree with what you're saying in your post. I guess that for the purpose of this thread, I deliberately looked at what is holding countries like Brazil back from a capitalist perspective. If the middle income trap (thank you, TurquoiseTastic) is true, then it seems that what capitalism is currently saying to countries is: "If you really work hard and make sacrifices, what you can strive for is to become a middle income country". That doesn't seem very enticing to me.
quote: TurquoiseTastic: I'm just going off the VSI to Global Economic History
I'm not sure if I'll get around to read this but thank you, also for what you said about productivity ratios.
quote: TurquoiseTastic: This is why a "big push" a la Japan is necessary (massive government intervention to produce a "ready-made" high-value economy all at once) in his opinion, although this too may fail (Soviet Union, Maoist China).
I'm not sure if those are good examples. First, it is interesting that a rather big government invention seems to be needed here which is rather opposite to people who are defending free market solutions. Second, how much room is there on the market for more countries doing such a big push? Would all 195 countries (give or take a few, depending on your political preferences) be able to do that?
quote: SusanDoris: I wonder how much effect the countries' religious beliefs have had?
This explanation has often been proposed, especially in answer to the question "the US and Brazil started out more or less in the same way; why has one succeeded more than the other?" I don't think it stands up though, at least not if you purely look at the different theologies.
To me, a much more convincing explanation is that rather quickly, families went to the US, and they had ready access to land. To the Spanish and Portuguese colonies went mostly men, and their respective crowns gave large swaths of land to people, leading to a system of land ownership that still causes problems today.
quote: Ricardus: How far are the BRIC countries and similar subject to speculative bubbles?
I can only say something about Brazil; I'm not sure if there were bubbles there. There is a small housing bubble going on where I live but that's only in the historic centre of a rather touristic city.
quote: stonespring: It seems we should be talking about what is going on in Brazil right now, seeing that the quote in the OP is a famous quote about Brazil and the OP either is in Brazil or has spent a lot of time there. There is a massive Petrobras scandal and ongoing economic stagnation.
No problem talking about other countries too, I think it is helpful to widen the discussion a bit. The situation in Brazil is rather dreadful at the moment, with a political, economical and health crisis coming together. A lot of people close to me are feeling this rather acutely right now. If you have 10 minutes to spare, I find that this video in English gives remarkably accurate and balanced portrait of the situation.
quote: stonespring: Are Rousseff, da Silva, and the Worker's Party any more corrupt than any other major political party or center of power in Brazil right now or previous parties, governments, and movements in the past?
Absolutely not. I'm quite certain that with the next elections (whether after an impeachment of at the end of this term), the PSDB will win. It's ridiculous to think that they aree less corrupt.
But, when the Workers' Party first came to power in 2002, one of the things they had going for them is that they hadn't been corrupt so far. So these things are a rather big disappointment for me.
quote: stonespring: Are the current and former president completely guilty as charged or is there at least some basis to their supporters' claims that they are being unfairly targeted, even if there was a lot of corruption among other members of their administration?
Not sure. My sympathies obviously lie with the left, but at this point I'm not excluding that they were involved.
quote: stonespring: Are they guilty of mismanaging the economy or are they just the victim of falling commodity prices and declining demand from China?
I guess this depends a lot on your political position. If you believe that they should have privatised the economy more and that spending on social programmes is a waste, then of course you'll find that they mismanaged the economy. But no-one can deny that they have done remarkably well for over 10 years, against all odds. Brazil also weathered the 2008 crisis well. I first arrived in the country in 1993, and the difference is remarkable.
quote: stonespring: Would any other party or ruler do any better right now or be able to form a better functioning coalition?
Not one that I can see, definitely not among the better-know politicians. If I could vote in Brazil, it would probably be for one of the smaller parties to the left of the Workers' Party. They have some grassroots support, but they still fall far short of being a political power.
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote: Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Is it possible the Western pursuit of individual materialism is the cause of the corruption we protest?
...the materialist me first value system the west promotes is the problem. Leaders who accept that teaching and build their bank accounts instead of building their countries are just the symptom.
I don't think the West taught the East and the South to be corrupt. Rather it is endemic in human affairs and what is remarkable is that protestant-led culture thinks there's something wrong with it.
Perhaps the West developed the ideal of selfless public service in response to the perception that individuals are primarily out to get what they can for themselves and those they care about ? An outlet for community-feeling in an individual-centred world ?
That the State's expenditure should be transparent, be fully accounted for, offer value for money, is part of a Western attitude to government. A state that serves the people and is accountable to the people. If individuals only exist to serve the State (identified with the nation or the tribe), why bother ?
-------------------- Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
So, the Brazilian president has been impeached, at least temporarily. I find this Guardian article rather accurate.
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
LeRoc--
I'm sorry you and the Brazilians are going through that.
I'm guessing it's both terrifying and wrenching; and maybe a relief, a bit, to at least get it in the open?
-------------------- Blessed Gator, pray for us! --"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon") --"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote: Golden Key: I'm guessing it's both terrifying and wrenching
Yes, it is many things at the same time: a political crisis, an economic crisis, Zika …
A couple of years ago, it was easy to get a job. Even if you were from a favela slum, you could work in security, as a waiter, in a oil refinery … A lot of my friends did that, and all these people are now being laid off.
I wasn't in Brazil in February, but people tell me that even Carnival was weak this year. And there's the Olympics coming up.
quote: Golden Key: maybe a relief, a bit, to at least get it in the open?
That would be nice, but I don't think so. This isn't something new: for most Brazilians this will just be confirmation that all parties are corrupt.
It also depends on how this will play out. The way I see it, either the Workers' Party will manage to find a way out of this, which means that some things will be brushed under the table, or other parties will come to power that are equally corrupt. Neither of these outcomes will allow for a lot of relief when it comes to corruption.
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
One of the more telling things I have read is that, unlike those politicians leading the effort to impeach her, President Rousseff is not charged with a form of corruption that involved enriching herself.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote: stonespring: One of the more telling things I have read is that, unlike those politicians leading the effort to impeach her, President Rousseff is not charged with a form of corruption that involved enriching herself.
To be honest, it doesn't even seem to be clear what exactly the accusation against Pres. Rousseff is that this impeachment is based upon. This alone leaves a bad taste with me already.
And I agree, one of the things the Workers' Party has been accused of since the beginning is paying MPs from other parties to go along with their policy proposals. That's bad of course, but you're right in saying that this isn't personal enrichment.
There are party members other than Rousseff who have been accused of personal enrichment, including ex-president Da Silva; it's something about construction work on his appartment. But even here it isn't very clear what exactly the accusation is.
The fact that the accusations are unclear by itself doesn't make these people innocent of course, but I do think that due process needs to be followed here.
-------------------- I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
This is a bourgeois coup nowhere near as vile as Chile's. But beyond Venezuela's bourgeois insurrection. Luckily we've gone beyond cold war proxies.
-------------------- Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|