Clique AQUI para voltar ao forum NOVO!
Como vai, Forasteiro?!
Parece que você é novo por este pedaço. Se você quer se envolver, clique em algum destes botões!
Usuários nesta discussão
- Botanico setembro 13
- Claudio setembro 12
- ENCOSTO setembro 12
- Fedidovisk setembro 11
- Fernando_Silva setembro 13
- Gorducho setembro 12
- Silvana setembro 1
- Spider setembro 12
CLAUDIO - Sites internacionais repercutem a saída da Dilma
ENCOSTO
Membro
The Real Reason Brazil Can Still Be "the Country of the Future"
Writing this week for Bloomberg, Tyler Cowan made the case that Brazil is “still the country of the future.” While I share Cowan’s optimism for the nation’s future, his focus on the country’s diversity, size, and vaguely federalized political structure overlooks the real story – that Austrian economics and libertarianism is winning the battle of ideas within the country.
Brazil is home to one of the fastest-growing and accomplished liberty movements in the world. Not only did organizations like the Mises Brasil, Students for Liberty Brazil and the Free Brasil Movement play a pivotal role in the suspension of president Dilma Rousseff but, as I love to point out, Ludwig von Mises is now the most searched economist in the country. More impressive still, as of last month, F.A. Hayek was searched more than John Maynard Keynes and Murray Rothbard was searched more than Milton Friedman. This is an incredible testament to the work of Mises Brasil, Instituto Rothbard and the other organizations within the country dedicated to spreading Austro-libertarian ideas.
The importance of this ideological shift can’t be overstated. After all, outside of his references to the current Olympic games and President Dilma Rouseff’s impeachment saga, there isn’t much in Cowan’s article that wasn’t true when The Economist was celebrating the country on its cover in 2009. That the country today is in the midst of its greatest economic crisis in over a century is an illustration that for all the resources Brazil may have as a country, only a nation with an intellectual climate that embraces markets and property rights can enjoy the fruits of sustained prosperity. Brazilians have the same choice as their their northern neighbors in Venezuela: capitalism or chaos.
If there is a silver lining to be found in Brazil's debilitating economic crisis is that it has made increasingly obvious the failings of the leftist status quo. As the funding for public services has been cut back, in part to pay for an over-budget Olympic Games and the corrupt cronies they attract, the market has been able to step in and provide vital services.
For example, as police officers protest budget cuts with signs reading “Welcome to Hell,” private security forces have filled the gap during the Olympic games. With over 60% of Brazilians fearing their country's police forces, in large part due to the growing number of police-related deaths, the demand for private protection has grown throughout the country.
Another socialized failure highlighted by this year’s Olympic games is the disastrous sewage situation in Brazil. With headlines around the world focusing on the serious health risks posed to any athlete that has exposure to the sewage-filled water in Rio, there is growing momentum to privatize Cedae, the state-owned water and sewage company. Like many of Brazil’s public companies, including the state-operated oil giant Petrobas that brought down Rousseff, Cedae is now under investigation for corruption.
Perhaps most importantly, private education has been thriving in Brazil. With laws allowing for the rise of for-profit universities in Brazil being passed in the 90’s, millions have gone through Brazilian private universities and the industry has attracted billions of dollars from international investors, with double digit growth since 2010. One major advantage of increased privatization of education is greater curriculum specialization and flexibility, which is particularly helpful given the diverse population Cowan highlighted. With Brazil’s significant Japanese and German speaking populations, the growing education market allows for schooling that can meet the specific demands for individual communities.
The fact that there is growing public sentiment supporting the privatization is a testament to the cultural changes that have taken place within the country. As Elena Landau, a former economist for Brazil’s development bank, has said, "Privatization is no longer a taboo.” This is in large part due to the incredible work of the various organizations within the country dedicated to spreading capitalism.
As Mises said in his book Economic Policy, “Everything that happens in the social world in our time is the result of ideas. Good things and bad things.“
If Brazil truly is “the country of the future,” it will due to it embracing the ideas of Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard.
The growing numbers of Brazilians dedicated to spreading capitalism and liberty are the greatest resource Brazil has.
Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.
https://mises.org/blog/real-reason-brazil-can-still-be-country-future
Leftist President Dilma Rousseff Removed from Office
https://mises.org/blog/leftist-president-dilma-rousseff-removed-office
Now it is official: Dilma Rousseff is no longer Brazil’s president. After almost two years of waiting, the country’s senate approved her impeachment. I will try to make here a brief summary of what happened, and write down some of my expectations for Brazil’s near political future.
The details of Brazilian law and Rousseff’s trial can get somewhat complicated, but the basics are that she spent public money she was legally not supposed to, most likely with electoral purposes.
But there are larger policy-based reasons for the opposition she faces, as well. Rousseff has basically a Keynesian economic mentality (I wonder if Brazilian socialists realize how far from Marx they really are), and she publicly claims that her stimulus-based policies were the right answer to the 2008 economic crisis. Rousseff's time in office has been about spending money, and lots of it.
The problem with that is that since Fernando Henrique Cardoso’s government (1995-2002), Brazilian law limits governors in how they can spend taxpayer funds. Rousseff’s party opposed these limitations and voted against these laws, believing them to be "undemocratic."
In the wake of so much spending, senators opposed to Rousseff have claimed her overspending is responsible for Brazil’s present crisis. Her defense was that she cannot predict the future. This fact did not stop her from attempting to plan the economy, however.
Is Rousseff a Democratic Martyr?
In her defense, Rousseff's supporters often compare her to former Brazilian president Getúlio Vargas, who they regard as a martyr of democracy. Vargas was president from 1930 to 1945 and again from 1951 to 1954. And yet, the only popular election he actually won happened in 1950. From 1930 to 1945 Vargas was a dictator who took power in a coup against the elected government. He committed suicide in 1954, because, according to his own words, he could not bear the growing opposition to his government.
In short, Vargas was no great model of democratic government. Even more oddly, considering his modern supporters, Vargas also persecuted communists. Ironically, though, Rousseff’s comparison to Vargas is very good: although Vargas's anti-communism might seem to set him apart him from Rousseff in the conventional political spectrum, Rousseff and Vargas actually share the basics: both are die-hard interventionists.
Just as former Brazilian communist icon Luís Carlos Prestes fought Vargas for years until becoming his ally (even tough Vargas was personally responsible for assassinating Prestes’ wife), Rousseff finds herself today on the side of the greatest dictator in Brazilian history.
What Does the Future Hold?
What can we expect for Brazilian political future? It seems that the Workers Party, Rousseff’s party, received a great blow. But it is not clear how much change this really means: Brazil has over thirty parties, and Rousseff's impeachment does not mean that the left has entirely lost its place in Brazilian politics. With the exception of the recently established Partido Novo (New Party), no party presents itself as economically liberal. Most parties are still on the left or at least on the center of the political spectrum.
There is, however, a libertarian movement going on in Brazil, especially among the young. Although this movement is not represented in any specific political party, it will probably play some role in future elections. Other than that, some politicians are starting to come out as more pro-market, even if their parties do not fully follow. The greatest example is Jair Bolsonaro, expected to run for president in 2018. In the past Bolsonaro was no friend of market-oriented economic policies, but today he seems to go in a different direction. Nevertheless, while many of his admirers are conservative in their personal behavior, they are not known for their support of markets in economic policy or politics. They still expect much from government.
Another rising star in Brazilian politics is Marina Silva, of the newly created party REDE. After almost twenty years in the Worker’s Party, she left first for the Green Party, and eventually to form her own party. Silva finished in third place in 2010 and 2014 presidential elections, and is still expected to become a major player in Brazilian politics. Her political ideas, however, are not all that new, and seem to mostly reflect Cardoso’s reforms in the 1990s, but without much more than that. Other than new parties or new candidates, Brazil still has its old political bedfellows. Cardoso’s party, PSDB, is still a major political force, and was pivotal in Rousseff’s impeachment process. Although Social Democratic in name, the party is known to harbor some true, pro-market liberals in its ranks.
To the left we have many parties. Some support Rousseff and say that the impeachment was a coup. Others pretend not to support her, while still casting doubt on the legitimacy of the impeachment process. PSOL is the best example of this, and has considerable support among the young and artists.
Rousseff is, as she herself has said, “a card off the deck,” and this is a victory for Brazil, especially for those who believe that the country’s future lies in more liberal policy.
Some political possibilities are leaning in this direction, while others still lean to the left. Brazilian electors still seem to be divided, and not just in party affiliation: Brazilians in general seem to live with the paradox of being somewhat traditional in morals, but very much to the left in economics and politics. But with Rousseff and the Worker’s Party out, there seems to be room for hope.
Bruno Gonçalves Rosi is an assistant professor at Candido Mendes University, Rio de Janeiro.
O ENCOSTO
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Entre ou Registre-se para fazer um comentário.
Direitos reservados de acordo com cada publicação, 2001 ~ 2014, Fórum Religião é Veneno.
As opiniões expressas e o conteúdo publicado neste fórum por seus usuários são de responsabilidade exclusiva dos seus respectivos autores e não representam as opiniões dos administradores e moderadores do "Religião é Veneno".
Desenvolvido e mantido pela Administração e Moderação.
Comentários
Enquanto ainda tem um tempinho de acesso, né ?!
Vc é terrível !!!
hahahahaha
abraços fraternos a ti
Silvana
No geral, jornais do mundo inteiro estão denunciando o golpe parlamentar ocorrido no Brasil.
DW Brasil, Alemanha
“Uma injustiça histórica”
El Pais, Espanha
O presidente que ninguém pediu, Michel Temer é o alvo da ira de amplos setores da população que não se sentem representados por ele.
The Guardian, Inglaterra
Editorial: Uma tragédia e um escândalo.
L’Humanité, França
Dilma Rousseff destituída, a direita logra seu intento.
Página 12, Argentina
Brasil diante dos olhos da história.
Página 12, Argentina
Golpes brancos, a nova tendência na América latina. De Honduras ao Paraguai a daí ao Brasil. Da periferia ao centro, do tosco ao sofisticado.
The Washington Post, EUA
Rousseff foi destituída baseada em acusações estranhas que teriam a ver com violações de leis orçamentárias.
The New York Times, EUA
Todos os “impeachment” são políticos. Mas no Brasil houve alguma coisa mais sinistra?
El País, Uruguai
Uruguai prepara uma declaração. Mujica e a Frente Ampla denunciam “golpe”.
La Jornada, Mexico
Essa história não acaba assim, “voltaremos com luta”, prometeu, combativa, Dilma Rousseff.
Clarin, Chile
O impeachment de Dilma e o baixo compromisso institucional da direita latino-americana.
Esfregaram o Financial Times na nossa cara quando elogiaram o crescimento do Brasil.
Mandaram o Financial Times calar a boca quando noticiaram a crise cada vez maior.
Lembra do Lula mandando embora o jornalista que publicou que ele era cachaceiro?
Pois é, também não mostraram isto na TV brasileira...
Assistam esta cena que as redes de TV do Brasil não mostram, mas é mostrado no exterior:
puxa!
Podem desrespeitar à vontade o percurso e os limites acertados com as autoridades. Ou sair às ruas sem aviso.
Mas se a polícia revidar ou tentar impedir o vandalismo terrorista, é taxada de violenta...
Lembrando: a Constituição permite a livre manifestação, mas especifica que terá que ser informada às autoridades com antecedência para se evitarem problemas.
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Acho que você também ficou feliz com a moça que perdeu um olho atingida por uma bala atirada por um PM no protesto em SP. Tem gente comemorando este incidente.
Tem mais algum?
Eu sei oq ocorreu antes da ação da pm. Você ignora.
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
- sem avisar
- com violência
Mas, para você, isto se justifica porque eles defendem a mesma coisa que você, portanto estão acima da lei.
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Daí eles forçam a passagem e depois querem posar de vítimas inocentes
- Nas manifestações pró impeachment os PM's eram aplaudidos e reverenciados como heróis do povo, enquanto os comunistinhas chamam eles de agentes da repressão, forçam passagem e jogam paus e pedras, isso deve causar uma certa antipatia.
Abraços,
O vídeo foi feito na manifestação pelo impeachment em 13 de março de 2016 na paulista. Ou seja, uma manifestação de direita. Nele uma mulher aparentemente bêbada começa a jogar garrafas num carro da polícia. Instintivamente, um policial vai até ela chamar a atenção. A mulher esculacha com o policial gritando na cara dele: "com quem você pensa que ta falando?", "ponha-se no seu lugar", "eu posso ferrar contigo". O policial percebendo a besteira que fez, em incomodar alguém da elite, começa a se cagar de medo da mulher. Mexer com bacana dá muito problema para um tira. Então ele intimidado se afasta da mulher. Um superior dele, percebendo que diversas pessoas estavam filmando o ocorrido, vai até o policial e o orienta a levar a moça presa, para não dar muita pinta de compreensão da polícia com uma atiradora de garrafas. Então ele, junto com outro policiais, seguram a moça com toda a delicadeza e educação possível e a levam para tomar um cafezinho com o delegado.
Se fosse uma mulher da periferia que atirasse uma garrafa contra uma viatura policial, esta mulher iria apanhar até não poder mais. Se alguém de esquerda for falar grosso com um policial numa manifestação leva borrachada na hora. Então esta é a diferença da ação da polícia entre um manifestação de esquerda e uma de direita. Na primeira a polícia desce o cacete, na segunda a polícia protege, ou seja faz o seu dever.
Numa manifestação de esquerda, alguns PMs são infiltrados à paisana no meio da multidão para causar algum tumulto. Tipo quebrar algo. Basta que uma única pessoa faça isto, que normalmente é um policial infiltrado, para a polícia jogar bomba em todos os manifestantes e descer a porrada em todos. Normalmente, a grande mídia não mostra manifestações de esquerda e quando mostra, é sempre com a finalidade de criminalizar os participantes dessas marchas, como se todos fossem vândalos.
Portanto, a PM bateu nos manifestantes, que protestavam contra o governo Temer, sem que eles tivessem feito absolutamente nada de errado. Agora que o governo irá cortar direitos sociais e trabalhista e aumentar o tempo de aposentadoria, entre outras maldades, mais protestos irão surgir. Em todos eles a polícia irá apenas para baixar a porrada, simplesmente porque são protestos de esquerda e por isto devem ser violentamente repreendidos, como forma de silenciar as vozes discordantes do sistema. A PM é covarde, fala fino com a elite e desce a porrada nos pobres, ou em quem luta por direitos para todos.
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Não é isso que estamos vendo. Não adianta ficar repetindo 100000 vezes. Tod mundo, que não seja do PT, já conhece o perfil dessa gente que está nas ruas.
São vagabundos. Tem mais é que apanhar mesmo. Eu achei pouco. E parabéns para a PM.
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
Puta merd*, será que vamos ter que desenhar?! O que deve a polícia fazer em frente a tanta ilicitude, cruzar os braços para não desagradar o Cláudio, é isso?
A polícia tem mais é que meter o cacete, ainda existe, felizmente, uma coisa chamada lei.
Os caras que pedem mais estado estão reclamando da presença do estado (risos); autorização para protesto ou monopólio da força.
Incrivel o nível de fanatismo.
Onde houver fé, levarei a dúvida!
- Evidência anedota, misturada com sua imaginação fértil.
Abraços,