3 ms·

I didn’t explain myself fully. For the US, I think a weaker executive would be good too. I don’t know much about Brazil’s political system. I know enough about

I didn’t explain myself fully. For the US, I think a weaker executive would be good too. I don’t know much about Brazil’s political system. I know enough about Bolsonaro to dislike his positions and actions, but it seems like the coordinated conspiracy against Lula was a huge factor, https://theintercept.com/2019/06/17/brazil-sergio-moro-lula-operation-car-wash/ https://theintercept.com/2019/06/17/brazil-sergio-moro-lula-.... Haven’t heard anything about first-past-the-post being an issue.

rglullis 6y ago
The issue is not with "first-past-the-post", the issue is about the huge divide between North/Northeast and Southeast/South of Brazil. I'd dare say is even worse of a problem that what the US has with Coastal States vs flyover country, or North/South. The southern, richest states complain about the federal government taking out more than what is put in - which is not always true: a lot of the problems from southern states is that they can't manage their finances and are constantly asking the federal government to bail them out. The people in the poorer northern states complain about not getting money and help even though the they are the biggest beneficiaries from the Union - the problem ends up being that most of these resources are diverted and go to the pockets of the powerful families in those states. And still, every election cycle everyone gets riled up over who is running for president when it would be better for everyone to look first to their cities and states. And while it certainly would be better for everyone if we could just reduce the power concentrated in the federal level, we have no single practical provision to do that. All that people can do is to root for their dog and realize that nothing ever really changes in a positive way. Aside: Lula is no saint. Worse than that, he is the devil that fools you into believing his kind soul and uses it to rob you blind. He is the one that brought this polarization to 11 with the goal of consolidating more power. He is the one that was making the state ever bigger during a few good boom years. He talked loudly about "working for the poor" but his (and Dilma's) economic policies were favoring always a few exclusive group of an elite that was interested in keeping him in power. Cronyism was rampant. It was under his tenure that the endemic corruption became systemic: every government contract job had a kickback scheme which would fuel his party and his allies. It was no conspiracy that put Lula in jail. He was the leader of what was essentially a kleptocracy who subverted all institutions to work in his favor. And none of that would be so easy to do if the people in the states had more control over what happens in Brasilia.

rglullis 6y ago

The issue is not with "first-past-the-post", the issue is about the huge divide between North/Northeast and Southeast/South of Brazil. I'd dare say is even worse of a problem that what the US has with Coastal States vs flyover country, or North/South. The southern, richest states complain about the federal government taking out more than what is put in - which is not always true: a lot of the problems from southern states is that they can't manage their finances and are constantly asking the federal government to bail them out. The people in the poorer northern states complain about not getting money and help even though the they are the biggest beneficiaries from the Union - the problem ends up being that most of these resources are diverted and go to the pockets of the powerful families in those states. And still, every election cycle everyone gets riled up over who is running for president when it would be better for everyone to look first to their cities and states. And while it certainly would be better for everyone if we could just reduce the power concentrated in the federal level, we have no single practical provision to do that. All that people can do is to root for their dog and realize that nothing ever really changes in a positive way. Aside: Lula is no saint. Worse than that, he is the devil that fools you into believing his kind soul and uses it to rob you blind. He is the one that brought this polarization to 11 with the goal of consolidating more power. He is the one that was making the state ever bigger during a few good boom years. He talked loudly about "working for the poor" but his (and Dilma's) economic policies were favoring always a few exclusive group of an elite that was interested in keeping him in power. Cronyism was rampant. It was under his tenure that the endemic corruption became systemic: every government contract job had a kickback scheme which would fuel his party and his allies. It was no conspiracy that put Lula in jail. He was the leader of what was essentially a kleptocracy who subverted all institutions to work in his favor. And none of that would be so easy to do if the people in the states had more control over what happens in Brasilia.