View
217
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
THE RISE OF THE NEW LEFT
“OLD” v. “NEW” LEFT
Old Left (1940s-1980s): sought to seize power through armed revolution; adhered to Marxist ideology; sought to impose radical social programs; most successful against retrograde dictatorships (Batista in Cuba, Somoza in Nicaragua)
New Left (1990s-present): seeks to win power through democratic elections; promotes a vague agenda of “social justice” and radical reform (not revolution); most successful under conditions of glaring social inequality (e.g. Venezuela, Brazil)
THE NEW LEFT: ORIGINS
Economic—lack of growth (through 2003), poverty and inequality, frustration with Washington Consensus
Political—weakness of representative institutions, inattention to poor, persistence of corruption; possibility of victory
International—war in Iraq, opposition to Bush policies and growing distaste for American society
MEMBERSHIP
Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela (1998, 2004, 2006, 2011, 2014) Lula, Brazil (2002, 2006) and Dilma Rousseff (2010, 2014) Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández, Argentina (2003, 2007, 2011) Evo Morales, Bolivia (2005, 2009, 2014) Daniel Ortega, Nicaragua (2006, 2011) Manuel Zelaya, Honduras (2006)* Rafael Correa, Ecuador (2006, 2010) Fernando Lugo, Paraguay (2008)* Mauricio Funes and Salvador Sánchez Cerén, El Salvador (2009, 2014) José Mujica, Uruguay (2010) Ollanta Humala, Peru (2011)
Near-Miss: Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Mexico (2006)
*ousted by “constitutional coup”
THE NEW LEFT: GOALS
Domestic—winning power, rearranging electoral alignments; overturning status quo, possibly through institutional reform; changing policy direction
Hemispheric—gaining support throughout Latin America (invoking “Bolivarian dream”), reducing U.S. hegemony (and opposing FTAA)
Global—challenging international order, forging alliances with developing world and non-aligned nations
CLARIFICATION
Disenchanted masses in Latin America ≠Voters for pink tide candidates ≠Leftist candidates for office ≠Leftist winners of presidential elections ≠Pro-Chávez chief executives ≠Hugo ChávezNotes:
Tidal swell is spontaneous, not organized Rivalries and defections
THE PROBLEM WITH HUGO
Used language of the street (including the Arab street)—e.g., the “devil” speech
Sat atop petroleum Put money where his mouth wasBroke established rules of the gamePlayed off resentment of Bush, U.S. powerChallenged Washington Consensus Went for high stakesSought rearrangement of prevailing world orderAnd now…? With changes in leadership?
U.S. VISIONS FOR LATIN AMERICA
Democratic—with tilt to right or center-rightProsperous—with commitment to free-market policies
and ties to United StatesUnified—under U.S. leadershipPeaceful—in view of unanimityDeferential—following U.S. lead in global arena
REALITY CHECK
Democracy = broad ideological spectrum, from “left” to “right”
Prosperity = mixed economies; rejection of Washington Consensus, FTAs, and FTAA
Ideology = diversity rather than unityOutlooks = anti-U.S. attitudes strong among large share
of population (slight improvement with Obama)Alliances = rejection of U.S. leadership and rules of the
game
CHALLENGING AMERICAN MYTHS
The Cherished Assumption—freely elected leaders will support U.S. policy
The Western Hemisphere idea—the new world is distinct from old, will forge common front in international arena
Democracy rationale for “regime change”—free elections as protective shield
The hegemonic presumption—the United States can dictate political life in Latin America
The End.
Recommended