11.10.2006
Election Mania
The last few weeks have been very exciting for politics junkies in the Western Hemisphere. Elections in Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and the midterms in the US proved thrilling theater for poll watchers in the Americas. We’ll barely have time to exhale, as Hugo Chavez’s reelection bid approaches in the first weekend of December.
While people often talk about the polarization of US politics, it is difficult to compare the red/blue division domestically to situations in Nicaragua and Venezuela. Bring up Chavez or Ortega to a national of either country and reactions fall in the extremes: perceptions are fraught with deep emotions. For opposition movements in each country, a win (in a democracy!) for these populists signifies much more than a difference in opinion vis-à-vis public policy; they represent authoritarianism, ineptitude, and megalomania.
One cannot say the same in America, although many a bleeding heart felt rage and despair when Bush was reelected in 2004. I always joked with my friends, “If you were a Democrat in 2000, and you wanted to come up with a Bush first term that would guarantee a Democratic win in ’04, you couldn’t have dreamt up a more ideal scenario.” In reality, one must govern from the center in order to be successful – the failure of Bush’s privatization of Social Security being just one example.
In Latin America, leaders such as Ortega and Chavez continue to appeal to the marginalized because they are politicians whom the poor feel actually represent them. The opposition, which split itself in half in Nicaragua and continues to shoot itself in the foot in Venezuela, could learn a lesson from the populists. Like the Democrats, they must find a way to represent more than just an alternative to those in power.
While people often talk about the polarization of US politics, it is difficult to compare the red/blue division domestically to situations in Nicaragua and Venezuela. Bring up Chavez or Ortega to a national of either country and reactions fall in the extremes: perceptions are fraught with deep emotions. For opposition movements in each country, a win (in a democracy!) for these populists signifies much more than a difference in opinion vis-à-vis public policy; they represent authoritarianism, ineptitude, and megalomania.
One cannot say the same in America, although many a bleeding heart felt rage and despair when Bush was reelected in 2004. I always joked with my friends, “If you were a Democrat in 2000, and you wanted to come up with a Bush first term that would guarantee a Democratic win in ’04, you couldn’t have dreamt up a more ideal scenario.” In reality, one must govern from the center in order to be successful – the failure of Bush’s privatization of Social Security being just one example.
In Latin America, leaders such as Ortega and Chavez continue to appeal to the marginalized because they are politicians whom the poor feel actually represent them. The opposition, which split itself in half in Nicaragua and continues to shoot itself in the foot in Venezuela, could learn a lesson from the populists. Like the Democrats, they must find a way to represent more than just an alternative to those in power.
# posted by Juanson : 5:30 PM
