MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, January 29th 2023 - 14:45 UTC



Signs of disarray in the Brazilian ruling coalition as president attacks corruption

Monday, August 22nd 2011 - 07:57 UTC
Full article 14 comments

Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff reached out to political allies to stem a growing rebellion within her coalition after the resignation of a fourth minister threatened to further tense already strained relations. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • GeoffWard2

    José Antônio Reguffe (PDT-DF) would seem to have the right attitude to corruption; coalition or opposition, he should catch Dilma's eye.

    Aug 22nd, 2011 - 02:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Tigre2000

    Good for her to attempt to clean the disease of corruption it takes
    courage and perseverance to get rid of greedy pigs in power who's interest
    only serves them and not for the masses.

    Aug 22nd, 2011 - 06:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    Go to it, girl. Weed out the thieves & drones who will drag your country down.

    Aug 22nd, 2011 - 10:05 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • xbarilox

    Cristina de Kirchner's always fighting corruption :p

    Aug 22nd, 2011 - 11:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • alastairkinghorn

    She will find greater support for her ant-corruption drive, if she heightens her public profile.
    Unlike Lula, who knew the value of publicity,Dilma seems to retain a civil servant's shyness of the press.
    A moral crusade against corruption, might give Brazilians some distraction away from rising inflation.

    Aug 23rd, 2011 - 12:36 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Fido Dido

    A moral crusade against corruption, might give Brazilians some distraction away from rising inflation.

    rising inflation what is caused by the Federal Reserve who continue to print US dollars (from thin air at close to zero procent) so that speculators have more fun. Do your homework, to understand who really cause world wide inflation.

    Aug 23rd, 2011 - 12:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    So Geoff's written on this thread yet he's failed to reply my post on the immigration thread which I wrote hours before? Geoff, com'on! You don't know how much I want to point out your blatant hypocrisy regarding affairs in Brazil vs those in the UK. When it comes to Brazil, there isn't a single negative expression on the English dictionary you won't use. When it comes to England, you blamed on the left-wing media? Oh, the loyal British nationalist fighting for his country's honor tooth and nail. There are no serious tensions within British society, he says. That's all on the Guardian's eyes. What an admirable devotion to his homeland.

    By the way, I want see what you think of this fine article by US blogger Glenn Greenwald:

    ”The Western World has long righteously denounced China for its attempts to control the Internet as a means of maintaining social order.(..) [But] in the wake of recent riots in London and throughout Britain -- a serious upheaval to be sure, but far less disruptive than what happened in the Middle East this year, or what happens routinely in China -- the instant reaction of Prime Minister David Cameron was a scheme to force telecoms to allow his government the power to limit the use of Internet and social networking sites. Earlier this week, when San Francisco residents gathered in the BART subway system to protest the shooting by BART police of a 45-year-old man, city officials shut down underground cell phone service entirely for hours; that, in turn, led to hacking reprisals against BART by the hacker collective known as “Anonymous.” As the San-Fransisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation put it on its website: “BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak.””

    Aug 23rd, 2011 - 01:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    Hi, Forgetit,
    I dropped Reguffe into this posting especially for you - no interest?
    I have no interest in Greenwald, but the DA Notices in the UK are receiving attention via the DA Committee to address internet traffic sensitive to the protection of the state.
    You have my immigration posting if you look carefully.

    Aug 23rd, 2011 - 09:26 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    I don't even know who Reguffe is.

    And who cares about what you feel about Greenwald. All I want is to see what you have to say about the growing authoritarianism in Western societies - including the British society - in this period of political instability. It certainly fits what I have always believed in - that laws aren't there to shield the inidividual against collective or government abuse, something classical liberals always say. Instead laws exist as attempts by governments to impose order. In times of stability, the government can afford some degree of liberty to the individual. But in times of social unrest, governments will try to achieve that goal by increasing its own powers - often by means of new laws - to regulate individual behavior. As I've always believed, Western governments aren't morally superior to the Chinese dictatorship or Muslim kingdoms. The only reason Western governments had liberal laws is because they could afford them without falling into social and political chaos. That is no longer the case - or at least it is increasingly less so. Whence, the coming authoritarianism of the new times.

    Aug 23rd, 2011 - 04:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    In time of social unrest governments often become military dictatorships. The trick is to manage a society in purturbation to return it to stability without the need for years of military governance.
    I must admit that the British have little direct knowledge of the Military Dictatorship process, but the British can and do learn from the experience of other countries.

    Aug 23rd, 2011 - 11:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Forgetit87

    The US govt has for the decade passed legislation - eg, the Patriot Act - or otherwise adopted authoritarian measures, measures that are sometimes hostile to freedom of speech (see its attitude regarding Wikileaks). It did so as a response to US instability in both the domestic and foreign arenas. A government can become authoritarian, or more authoritarian, without degenerating into a dictatorship. Military dictatorships are usually the way South America, and certain parts of Asia, deal with social unrest and political polarization. In Europe, however, what we're seeing is that it is the spectre of authoritarian democracies that is looming larger. It's not inefficient democracies that are being threatened by authoritarian forces; it is instead the democracies themselves that are trying to adapt to more unpredictable times by scaling up state power. The same goes for the US.

    There's no way to return to stability without solving the issues that are generating instability. In Europe and the US, the issue is unemployment and budget cuts that are eliminating public services for the working classes. Unless economic growth resumes, which is not expected to happen soon, either those countries will become increasingly shaky and will eventually give way to authoritarian states, or (as has happened more recently in LatAm from the 90s onwards) there will be an explosion in urban crimes rates.

    “I must admit that the British have little direct knowledge of the Military Dictatorship process, but the British can and do learn from the experience of other countries”


    Aug 25th, 2011 - 12:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • GeoffWard2

    Why, my friend!
    The British learn from Brasil and Argentina, and Amnesty Reversals!
    The British learn from South Africa, Mandela, and Real Reconciliation.

    They learn over the centuries of 'British democracy' that the extremes of dictatorships of the Right and of the Left might be the most stable, but the Centre - with all its scope for instability - provides the best for the people, both physically and psychologically.
    That's why the Centre's checks and balances created over the centuries are so necessary, and why the London riots are a failure of society to assert them.

    Which UK checks? which UK balances?
    (i) The 2 Labour administrations' failures - 2 PMs, Chancellor of the Exchequers, Head of the Bank of England, and Head of the Financial Services Agency - FAILED to act to protect.
    (ii) The Metropolitan Police Force - withdrew its duty to stop riot in progress - FAILED to act to protect.

    Consider, for a moment, a generation that has grown up to 'soft control' of public order. . . . .
    How would it react if SERIOUS POLICING became necessary - eg, if spasmic monitary collapse took place in the main Western economies?
    The Briish public needed exposure to 'negative policing' (my phrase for the Police's handling of the riot in London), in order for it to accept 'positive policing' once more, should it prove necessary.
    Greece was a huge 'wake-up call' to the Western world.


    Aug 25th, 2011 - 10:58 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Felipe RamonGama

    Geoff, your view on the police difficulty in handling the riots seems perfect to me. Indeed the impression I get from the news is that the British Police just didn't know what to do in a big conflic situation, which is obviously the result of so many years without this kind of thing happening.

    I don't want to go too much into the political points here, I don't know enough of the social situation in the UK to do that, so I will just talk of the ”military' side of it.

    Compare these riots in the UK with the ones that usually happen in China and look at the difference in the Police actions. Or remember that operation the Rio de Janeiro Police performed a few months ago to take an area that was controlled by hundreds of criminals armed with assault rifles, grenade launchers and even RPGs.

    It's clear the difference in combat efficiency between these forces. And the reason for that is simple, the Rio police wars against gangs with assault rifles in hostile territory almost daily, China's police is always taking down riots, and British police did nothing of that (I'm guessing most of their work, apart from stopping lone crimes, is to investigate terrorism possibilities).

    And that's not necessarily a bad thing, it means things were rather peaceful, which is great, but it also leaves the Policemen unprepared.

    So, what could be done to change that? I can only think of one thing, something that was done 5000 years ago. Make them Mercenaries.

    Have the local based police for normal crimes, sure. But the special unit for cases like this (which most countries have) can't be made to just stand there training without getting experience. If there are no riots or big armed gangs in the country, send them to a country where there are, this way they can get experience for when a riot happens in their base country. Not to mention it will bring at least money enough to pay for these special units.

    I don't see why this isn't done more often.

    Aug 25th, 2011 - 01:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • lsolde

    @13Felipe Ramon Gama,
    Great ldea!

    Aug 25th, 2011 - 10:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!