What's going on in Latin America's life laboratory?

Latin America is like a stadium: something happens and cheering explodes. Protests in Chile? Left goal! The rise in Ecuador? Double score! But here goes former union president Evo Morales down in Bolivia: the right narrows the advantage. End of part one. In the second part, the left is reaching Argentina and Mexico, hoping to capture Colombia and Peru. But the right hand does not despair - Brazil is on its side! And he doesn't give up: Venezuela and Cuba are shaking.

There is no doubt that there is anger and frustration; nor do some imitate others: social networks cut the ring of protest; and it is certainly true that the crowded squares have at least one point in common: “the crisis of political mediation”, the division between voters and elected officials. Otherwise why “shih” and not polls? But for this to justify a single and epic narratory crusade against “nelibralism “, the usual and ever close to capitalism” This does not stand, neither in heaven nor on earth. Also, “djathta” and “mita” are not the lights needed to understand something. Fans generalize, that's known, but instead of cheering, it's better to think, recognize, appreciate.

Pacific Countries

The biggest flames have been set up in Chile, where they are still burning; they were already raised in Ecuador against the rising price of gasoline, and then spread to Peru and Colombia - in the Pacific, in short, there is great turmoil. It's surprising at first sight: here the economy has grown far more than elsewhere; besides Ecuador, where Lenín Moreno doesn't know how to fill the fiscal pit inherited from Rafael Correa and nobody wants to pay the cost, other countries have good accounts; all of them, in addition, have a recent history of growing social mobility and poverty reduction. So? What are they complaining about?

That nonsense question. Did Italy at the peak of the economic boom achieve social peace? Or did the reverse get into years of violent turmoil? In Pacific countries, some protests are repeated: mutatis mutandis, and they also remind you of Italy's past. On the one hand, it's the peaceful protest of the increasingly demanding middle class: wars and dictatorships are now behind us; What drives them is the desire for services and better wages to distribute equal ways - the cake that has grown. They no longer endure the obstacles of solid corporations with hepanic traits. They want more democracy, in short, and a capitalism at “Social”, the only one that tolerates Latin and Catholic countries.

On the other hand, there are radical groups, mainly students, who play the old scenario in a new way: they want to destroy “capitalism” by force. It doesn't make any excuses to say that if in their countries now it's possible to distribute wealth better, it's because they have market economies, able to produce it, not that Latin American countries that have reduced capitalism are in worse shape. Faith does not feel the reason, and each generation must invent the wheel from scratch. Patience is needed. But it is obvious that the left is cheering for them: fighting the governments “neoliberist”, whatever that word means.

It means that the borders between the two protests are everywhere unclear, and their outcome depends on various factors: whether governments and political classes will be able to provide adequate and quick answers, an clay will be able to stem the tide; fiscal reform more distributional and more efficient and socially charged spending is the priority. If, on the other hand, they're going to get angry and board tigers, the melting of two protests will become an explosive cocktail, opening the door to the typical Latin American explosion: to save anyone. Forecast? Chile, due to economic prosperity and institutional solidarity, is the most likely to stop the shock. Others are in serious danger.

Bolivarians

Bolivarians

Flames in the Pacific have failed to hide what started in Bolivia, although they served to lower the curtain on western democracy and violent oppression in Venezuela and Nicaragua. It is futile to talk about Cuba: abuses are daily bread. There are protests that “left” despises and “right” ifeston. Granted: Of course, they are not fighting “nelibralism”! Rather, they are uprisings against the regimes, the Bolivarians, who “nelibrism” takes pride in having him gone. Funny, because it's actually half true: Venezuela and Cuba, which “committed” capitalism “demonic” swims into misery; Bolivia and Nicaragua, which with “capitalism” have flirted for interest, have been kept in life, although their accounts have long shown the rope. But the problem that unites them, mobilizing squares and causing so much violence and death, is another: democracy, respect of popular vote, power sharing, individual freedoms.

So if protests in Pacific countries are conflicts in democracy, those in the Bolivarian countries are conflicts over democracy: they have nothing to do with quality but its very nature. Hence, they are far more destructive and stable in time.

How is that explained? History comes to our aid: The “Bolivarian” regimes are born of an ideological foreign and hostile log against liberal democracy; they have a religious « «): they interpret victory at the elections as a divine mandate, such as the ecstasy from slavery, to the promised land. So they invade the state as if it were theirs, use public money as private property, courts as punishment sword, school and media as instruments “revolutionary”. Their “People”, according to Evo Morales or Nicolaás Maduros, is “the chosen people “, the warehouse of a “culture” that liberalisation, in its anxiety about “ <xhomogenic” the world, threatens to destroy.

It's quite a problem: what kind of democracy can arise where politics is a crusade against the earliest? What is the significance of rule of law and representative institutions, “biya” the degenerate minds of the philosophers of Enlightenment? Anxiety to perpetuate self in power as Catholic kings is not the product of mad egos, but an ideology in which God's “ “the men of God are not meant to bow before “the people of the Constitution”. Democracy? Just as long as the right “is won, the famous Montesquieuu powers will never enter here, Fidel Castro said. Here you can also find the source of the uncut electoral manipulations of Evo Morales. They are modern theocracy, confession regimes. If Nicolaas Maduro warms hearts, it is not surprising: Italian fascism also had its left “<x9; so did Spanish falangism.

The Restitution of PanLatinism

Then it's Mexico and Argentina. They're used to flames, but they're not doing well: the first is under the edge of economic stagnation, the second running backward. No ray of sun pierces their horizon. However, they make admirable announcements and proclaim Great Reformations. There is one question: can Mexican nationalism and Argentina Peronism solve what they have produced in their long history? Could the drug also be the cause? Authorism and pantendalism, demagogia and clienteleism, patrimonialism and inefficiency: They swear to change, but the origin is what it is.

As soon as it was chosen, Argentinasius Alberto Fernández rushed to Mexico City to embrace Andreés Manuel López Obrador; they will build the Great Land, the unity of Latin America. Who, more than a Peronist, heir to the dream of pan-lain unity of the old Argentinean general, and a Mexican nationalist, a Grand Revolution student who erupted in 1910, has the right to succeed where everyone has failed? “The Pueblas” Group, the new progressive “of Latin America”, will be their umbrella. Left “” looks for them. They want to “develop urine” and “prepare education and health”, promote “social inclusion” and create dignified “subspecies”. Great. However, they forget to explain how, with what means, they have a source.

So “Puebla” Group replay an old soup. But what failed in the past will fail again for the same reason; because it claims to base Latin unity on ideology and not interests, on the romantic idea of pueblo and not on the democratic idea of “citizenship”, on a “heltb” moral and not on an institutional “. He calls “integrim”, but wants a “created”; integration is a pact between variables, joining is an equal ray, a community of faith. To unite Latin America, he thinks, all should become “progressors”, all governments in the same color. So Perón, Castro, Chavez failed: driven out of the door would turn out the window. And two incompatible Latin American ideas will continue to fight among themselves. Any “progressive” will be followed by a “conservator”: it's logical and psychological.

Fascist Without Fascism

On the opposite row of the scale with that of “progressors”, in fact, is the Brazil of Jair Bolsonaro! It's worse than going into the night. He mentions the cross and shakes the sword, wants economic freedom, but woe to those who talk to him about civil rights. The god of reactionary evangelists will remove that of revolutionary Catholics, he thinks. This is what Chilean dictator Augusto Pinocet once dreamed of: technology without democracy, great morality and controlled freedom; what Colombian conservatives dream of, loyal to former President Alvaro Uribe. That's how crusades “right” everywhere against crusades “left”, religious warfare has once again replaced political dialectics. Fortunately, the fascist “today cannot create a fascist regime; just as the left “” clerical cannot create a Christian regime. Lame comfort.

Lab for what?

Undiscreeted by so much chaos, it echoes from the steps one od for Latin America squares, “lababorator” of Latin America, to even the “Accession” of Latin America; ed for exorciating rage against constructive patience, for economic anxiety against the prosaic construction of institutions. One more time! It's not the future that progresses, but the past that comes back is the common and ancient history of “to the right <x4x5> technocratic and “left <x7-9>, sovereign “. National “A story in a long-term search for God's Kingdom on earth, a paradise of “on the right” and Eden on “left”, filled with endless fanaticisms and slim reforms, harsh protests and flawed proposals, pindarian flights and horrible collapses on the ground. It's a viscosus past to put you in jail.

The left “wants more state, but then uses it as carrots for believers and a stick for the unfaithful; it condemns inequality, but instead of eliminating poverty, it punishes wealth. The right “” sways between the abstract liberalisation of its intellectuals and the tendency to live with its entrepreneurs' income; cultivates out - of - date aristocratic clothing and claims hypocritical and moldy morality. Everyone calls “democracy”, but hardly tolerate it. Democracy with representation that we all know was narrow. Instead, they would like it to be “organic” or <x8-partative”, national “” or <x12) popular”. It usually works bad or doesn't work at all.

When the smoke of news review disappears and accounts are done with the jinn of history, we will likely find out what we already knew: that, each in its own way, “right” and “left” of Latin America fight the same enemy. The eternal enemy of Spanish Christianity. Immanent Rationism, liberal culture. Latin America was sometimes the laboratory of this conflict.

The world.al