Skip to comments.Peru confirms Latin America's swing to the Left
Posted on 06/07/2011 1:21:36 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
First it was Venezuela, then Bolivia, then Ecuador, then Nicaragua. Now its my native Peru. One by one, largely unremarked here, Latin Americas nations are turning to the authoritarian Left.
Ollanta Humala, who won yesterdays presidential run-off, is typical of the breed of modern caudillo. A cashiered former army officer, he had concocted an angry and aggrieved programme which mingled ethnic nationalism, hostility to private enterprise, nostalgia for pre-Columbian times and anti-Chilean revanchism.....
Humalas opponent in the run-off was Keiko Fujimori, daughter of the man who, as president in the 1990s, closed down Congress and gave himself autocratic powers, and who is now serving 25 years for human rights abuses. Mario Vargas Llosa saw it as a choice between two illiberal extremes or, as he graphically put it, between AIDS and cancer. He voted, reluctantly and fearfully, for Humala.
Humala, who used to boast of his closeness to Venezuelas Hugo Chávez, now says he has moderated his views, and I hope to God he means it. Look at the other Chavists who have seized power in the neighbourhood, such as Bolivias Evo Morales and Ecuadors Rafael Correa. They may not be exactly anti-democratic, but they are certainly anti-parliamentary; Bonapartists, if you like. Having got themselves more or less fairly elected, they promptly set about dismantling every constraint on their power: the national assembly, the electoral commission, the supreme court, independent media, business associations. In order to maintain their popularity, they keep picking fights with Washington, with the IMF or, when all else fails, with each other.
After years of languishing, Peru has recently enjoyed far stronger growth than neighbouring countries. Yet the markets have reacted sharply to Humalas victory: the currency is plummeting and the stock exchange down.....
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
There was no good choice.
Could you expand upon that please?
Oh goodie, so Latin America is slipping back into their self made letist cesspool of old.
The fact is Humala was elected and therefore is the one in power.
It does not change the truth of the title.
True. But the word-picture that one gets when reading the title is that the Peruvians wanted to move left. Whereas the real story is that there were too many Center candidates who cancelled each other’s votes out in the first round and hence the voters only had two, bad choices. They chose what they thought was the lesser of two evils (probably remembering that Fujimori’s dad is still in jail and she wants to let him out)
So where do they go now for their future?
however, what would you do in their situation in the 2nd vote? I'm not sure what I would do quite frankly. Maybe abstain, but even if I did, what difference would it make?
Sea Parrot --> the Peruvian elections have multiple candidates and 2 rounds -- if in the first round no one wins 50%+ of the vote, then the top two candidates face off in the second round.
This time what happened was that the two right-wing candidates: Luis Losso and Keiko Fujimori were leading. But then there came two politicians with a centrist policy: Pedro Kyczynski and Alejandro Toledo.
People didn't trust humala or fujimori, but the central votes were split
Hence the run-off was between the leftist and Fujimori.
The Peruvians had two bad choices -- and they picked one. They did not "swing" so much as shrug with no options and trudge.
I dunno if Chavez is smart enough to think up that scenario. I think the centrist politicians shot themselves in the foot.
The swing to the left in S. America is easy to solve. The first job of out next President should be to FREE CUBA and VENEZUELA! Take out the Castros and the ideas die. Take out Chavez and the money stays in Venezuela and is not spent on supporting S. America COMMIES!
I heard a very good idea of how the US can ruin Iran and I think the same can be used against Chavez: make it the law that no one can sell any petroleum product that uses any Irani or Venezualan oil. Much of the oil products are mixed, so the US definitely consumes Irani or Venezualan oil. By cutting this out, they lose their biggest market. There becomes a glut in the market and their sale prices go down.
Europe, NA, AU, and most of the rest of the world turning right.. SA is soo mixed up.
It’s easier to just take out the Castros and Chavez. We can’t do much directly with Iran....unless!
Your idea could work if we ramp up our production to cover the loss of Ven. crude. They can’t sell it anywhere else because no one can refine it in any volume.
We don’t have much leverage with Iran as we consume almost no Iranian crude. We should just nuke those bastards and get it over with!
oh, it’s not my idea — my grasp of economics doesn’t extend to more than evaluating which mutual fund I should invest in (and there I need loads of help!). I got that from some magazine or website (can’t remember which one) and it seemed a good idea to me, but again, i’m no economist, so don’t really know enough
Chile, Colombia and Canada have all elevted right of center governments. There is hope if we can get rid on Obumma!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.