MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Towering inferno in Sao Paulo: 24-storey building collapses after huge blaze
A 24-storey building used by squatters in the center of Sao Paulo, Brazil's biggest city, collapsed early Tuesday after a blaze that tore through the structure, leaving at least three missing. Survivors described waking in the night to find themselves surrounded by flames and escaping with their children before the tower turned to rubble. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWith this tragedy, the lid has been blown off a disgusting mafia. As suspected, but no one talked about, for fear of reprisals, it has finally come out that ALL the several social movements , ostensibly 'fighting for homes for the homeless', are simply criminal organizations exploiting the poor. Small groups of people in relatively comfortable social positions, go around searching for buildings that can be 'invaded', then they organize the 'peaceful' invasion, distributing the space according to each familiy's needs, What no one ever mentioned, is the fact that they charge fees (rent) varying from $ 200 to $400 per month...if the 'tenants' don't pay or delay paying, they are kicked out by the leaders of the movement, who are bringing in, according to preliminary calculations, about R$ 5 million /month, of which not 1 cent reverts to improvements in the invaded buildings. Dozens of survivors of the collapsed building finally decided to tell their stories. It is no more than a criminal and highly-politicized activity...proof of this is the fact that the PSOL presidential candidate, Guilherme Boulos (from upper-middle class), is the leader of the umbrella organization, MTST...and as to be expected, not one of the leaders of these movements (some already photograhed in expensive cars) were found to comment....
May 03rd, 2018 - 06:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Is that the kind of sh*t , that the lefties want as president ?
Another interesting fact : Boulos is one of Lula's great friends, hopes to step into Lula's shoes, and was standing beside Lula during the pathetic show that the PT and the Metal workers' union put on one day before Lula was jailed.
@JB:
May 04th, 2018 - 10:28 am - Link - Report abuse 0TRUE!
REF: “the lid has been blown off a disgusting mafia”:
I'd add - “TEMPORARILY”!
Wow, seriously? Where did you see that?
May 04th, 2018 - 05:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@DT
May 04th, 2018 - 11:02 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's all over the news, on every TV station.....the survivors are so pissed-off with the leaders of these several movements, and rightly so, that they've finally found courage to speak up and denounce the dirt behind the 'façade' of helping them find a place to live. The press have tried to talk to the various 'leaders', but most have disappeared. Boulos was eventually tracked down - in Curitiba, with Lula's rag-tag army sieging the Federal Police HQ - and said he couldn't return to SPaulo, but that the authorities were to blame, as they have done nothing for the homeless ; Between doing nothing for them, and sending them into death traps, there's a big difference.
And now they got what they always dreamt of:
May 06th, 2018 - 11:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0https://i0.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Temer-quer-mulher.jpeg?resize=580%2C420&ssl=1
@DT
May 06th, 2018 - 05:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Further to the above, 'sending them into death traps' while the 'leaders' of such movements profit from it. One of them mol admitted the charge ; another, as expected, denied it (he lives in an 8-bedroom house, drives a brand new car), but is contradicted by dozens of survivors (plus potential victims from other 'occupations').
Just going back to TD...
Ok, I had seen that. It all boils down to TD accusing Zucolloto (a friend of Moro’s) of claiming he had contacts inside the LJ task force and that for a price, he could intermediate some deal to get him a light sentence. Don’t know how TD can prove his allegations, and I doubt that Zucolotto, or anyone else, has that kind of influence within the LJ; Zucolotto denies he ever offered such facilities and the LJ taskforce prosecutors allege they don’t even know Zucolotto....so someone is lying.
Looks like things got hairy for TD after his attempt to negotiate a plea-bargain failed, and Moro ordered his arrest. Don’t know whether we’ll ever really know what transpired between TD / Zucolotto, but the fact the former was involved in the Odeb/PMDB/PB bribery, doesn’t say much for him.
The immediatism/ instability is a vicious circle...to break it, not easy. Specially where the order of the day is to make a quick buck. I think it’s reasonable to say that Brazil’s government prioritizes what interests its members, or whatever reaches a point of no longer being able to be ignored.
Your last paragraph goes without saying....but 1) politicians from privileged backgrounds are all too aware of the problems, and most couldn’t care less...they do only the bare minimum - when they do - to look as if they did ; 2) do not recall any politician who came from a poor background, of doing very much for those who put them there. Their promises are rarely kept....background has little influence on their morality.
@JB:
May 06th, 2018 - 05:35 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Being a politician is a hereditary profession which runs into their families. The power [& whatever goes with it] is passed on from one generation to the next. With “one-step-ahead BUT two-steps behind”; the Democracy could well be progressing on an “Auto Self-Destructive” Path - in case if no one has noticed it:
https://i0.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Foro-Privilegiado-e-os-Politicos.jpg?resize=580%2C399&ssl=1
@:o))
May 06th, 2018 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Being a politician is a hereditary profession which runs in their families”.
100% true. And they represent 0,025% of the top 1%......
@JB
May 06th, 2018 - 09:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There's still nothing about the social movements charging rent to the squatters in the English language press, and the big Brazilian papers have stupid anti-copying things on their websites that make them a bitch to google translate. :(
RE TD, I thought you must have seen it. I think TD claimed to have the conversation on some instant messaging app or other, but who knows. I also found an interview with him in El País and he doesn't even mention this but claims he went to Spain to attend a tax inspection of his two Spanish companies. Yeah right.
I don't know anything about Zucolotto, could it be that he didn't hae any real influence with the LJ task force but he found out what deal they were going to offer TD and pretended to negotiate it in order to get a bribe? Maybe that's a bit implausible?
As for the politicians, it hardly makes a difference what background they are from, or what their ideology is, if the only thing they are interested in is enriching themselves. Only if they actually want to improve the country does it matter whether they have any idea how to do it. Is it true that so many are from just a few families?
@DT:
May 07th, 2018 - 10:47 am - Link - Report abuse 0REF:“if the only thing they are interested in is enriching themselves”
“IF”???
By the virtue of being recognized as a Leader [political, social, etc]; his/her main reason for being a leader; is to:
- Improve the Standards of living
- Improve the Quality of Lives
- Lower the Costs of living
But judging from the path on which Brazil is; one can clearly visualize the future of the Brazilian-Masses.
@DT
May 07th, 2018 - 02:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All I can say is that English-language press is not doing its job. The facts are out in the open and the police are looking into the accusations.
Re TD/ Zucolotto, wouldn't trust either of them....one might be telling the truth, the other is lying. Any person looking to negotiate a plea-bargain would have to go through a lawyer, but I don't believe Zucolotto has the influence he allegedly claimed to have. Wouldn't put my hand in the fire for any of them, but it does sound implausible.
Regarding the politicians, the northeastern oligarchic families have always had their reps in Congress......in other regions it is not as evident, but sure does exist. Not only do they steal, but their mission is to promote legisation that favours their family's and friends' businesses.
Over the years, have only seen a small handful of politicians who seem to be interested in doing something for the people, but even then it is difficult....the majority always wants something in exchange for supporting them.
W0W! AT LAST [at least] the NEXT generation is here!
May 07th, 2018 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0THAT's progress!
Now, the stealings can now reach the next level of sophistication - supported/protected by the special privileges!
http://noticias.band.uol.com.br/politica/noticias/100000912430/filha-de-eduardo-cunha-vai-tentar-uma-vaga-na-camara.html
At least she's better looking than Cunha ...
May 07th, 2018 - 05:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@JB:
May 07th, 2018 - 06:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0:o)) The next generation has many beauties, much smarter than the older generation, one of them could be Dan-Dan!
@JB
May 07th, 2018 - 10:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I'm not totally surprised there's nothing about the accusations in the UK press. We do get news from South America but it's never very complete. I'm sure it would be in the news if it happened in the US.
RE the politicians, looks like you're about to get a new political dynasty. But for two people who can't agree on anything, it amazes me how similar you sound to Enrique sometimes... Maybe it shouldn't, I guess pretty much everyone wants to give those oligarchs the boot, they just can't agree on what to replace them with.
What you say the majority wants something in exchange I guess you mean something immediate and tangible? Seems like more short term thinking, and a similar problem in that no one can trust the politicians so they demand immediate results.
@DT:
May 08th, 2018 - 03:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “everyone wants to give those oligarchs the boot, they just can't agree on what to replace them with”:
TRUE!
They'll replace the EXISTING Crooks with the NEW ones! There really is NOBODY else to take place of the well-established racketeers - only the new [unknown] ones - all somehow related to the ill-reputed old fogies.
http://www.portalfiel.com.br/uploads/charge/42fa529f2e1fa628bed26746467daa2b.jpg
@DT
May 08th, 2018 - 07:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“But for two people who can't agree on anything, it amazes me how similar you sound to Enrique sometimes......
The only similarity 'might' be that in certain cases we both agree that politicians in general are out to only protect and further their own interests, and it ends there. We differ greatly when it comes down to his insistent defence of Lula, for which he can present nothing to back his statements...looks like he selects those politicians with whose ideology he identifies, and ”forgives“ them for their crimes in view of ”how much” they (allegedly) did for the people...in other words he elects his favourite crook and sticks by him no matter what.
When I say the majority wants something in exchange, that's about it....doesn't necessarily need to be immediate, but sure has to be tangible. When you finally realize that most politicians want to be elected only to benefit themselves, you start to understand why they spend their time wheeling and dealing amongst themselves and rarely do anything for those who elected them. The people's own fault, for not seeing 'through“ them...
Regarding the 'end' of the 'priviliged status” (total immunity for 'any' crime), the fact is it has only been 'slightly restricted”...(nothing like the original intention which was to turn politicians into common citizens when it came down to the jurisdiction in which they'd be tried). The STF's ruling (basically 7 judges wanting to end the privilege, 4 not so much) doesn't really change much. Now (and until any new, more restrictive measures are adopted), the present ruling dictates that when a politician “in office”, commits a crime “related to his parliamentary functions” (corruption etc), his case will still go the the STF...where the crimes will probably prescribe before he is tried ; only if he commits a common crime (murder, rape etc) will he be tried by a lower court....so in essence the STF only removed the protection they had against common crimes...Big deal !
@JB
May 08th, 2018 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's not just that. EM complains about Argentina being run by oligarchic families who aren't even capitalist, but feudal, and you say the same about the NE in Brazil. You complained about Lula allowing too many cheap Chinese imports that undercut industry in Brazil, and concentrating too much on commodity exports instead of manufacturing, and EM says the same thing about imports of all kinds in Argentina today. And you defend the military government in Brazil, while EM defends Castro, because according to both of you, they weren't democratic but were better than the alternative.
If I asked you both for solutions to the problems in Brazil and Argentina though, you'd say *very* different things.
”when a politician “in office”, commits a crime “related to his parliamentary functions” (corruption etc), his case will still go the the STF”
Damn! I was really hoping it wouldn't include corruption. But I think there could be a loophole for the police: politicians change jobs, and crimes committed in previous positions would not be during their current mandate, so could they be prosecuted in the ordinary courts?
Anyway, I don't think you can blame the people too much. How are they supposed to find someone who's not corrupt to vote for? Worse than a needle in a haystack, especially if you also require they at least vaguely agree with your beliefs, and will be reasonably competent.
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
May 09th, 2018 - 09:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0“There's still nothing about the social movements charging rent to the squatters”
What you have to consider is the source and how credible it is likely to be? This is the same person who gives an unsupported narrative as to the so 'called communist conspiracy'. He has so far apparently never indicated any inclination, skill-set, ethical standard to provide more than scuttlebutt from the local bar.
@JB:
May 09th, 2018 - 10:37 am - Link - Report abuse 0REF: “turn politicians into common citizens when it came down to the jurisdiction in which they'd be tried”:
Absolutely - 100% - true but unmanageable because:
- the convicted are not only permitted in the political parties but they are also supported to be the candidates
- the misdeeds of the parties + the members go through a superficial “Plastic-Surgery”; to hoodwink the masses
- the Special-Privileges + the intentional Loopholes
- Laws created BY the crooks; in favor of the crooks
So; In Black, White & Colors:
https://i1.wp.com/www.humorpolitico.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Votando-em-Ladrao.jpg?resize=768%2C596&ssl=1
@TLiarH
May 09th, 2018 - 03:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0There's nothing in the English language media. I'm sure JB can link to some articles from Brazil about it.
@DT
May 09th, 2018 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0So EM & I can mol agree that most Bzln / Argy politicians are a bunch of opportunists. Even if we defend similar objectives, we sure don't defend the same solutions to get there. Official stats destroy his rhetoric about Lula, but he can't see that.
While 99% live off honest work, politicians do what they do because it's easier and offers quicker 'returns'. And a fat pension, after only 8 yrs. Our perception of most politicians is similar, but EM chooses to exclude those he likes - CFK, Lula, Dilma. Sure he knows more about Argentina than I do, but he can't claim the same with regards to Brazil. As they say here, “he's heard the cock crow, but doesn't know where”....
Regarding “you defend the military government in Brazil, while EM defends Castro”...not that simple nor really comparable : the military took over to prevent communism, 'n killed how many ? 400 ? while the in Cuba, the Castros took over to implement communism (backed by USSR), killed thousands, have dozens if not 100s of political prisoners, and still hang on to 'absolute' power....two completely different situations. And if EM defends Cuban “democracy”, we sure have different definitions for it.
As to asking us for solutions, and the probability we would come up with different proposals, don't know which his would be, but handouts (BF) is not the solution for sustainable progress. Providing education is.
STF's ruling :1) for Congress : Crimes related to parliamentary duties (corruption etc), obviously only while in office = STF. Common crimes send them to lower court.
2) for the other (roughly) 38,000 politicians (prez, VP, govs, deputies, mayors, councilmen) , the STF forgot them...total immunity carries on...while they are in office, if accused of any crime, committed at any time, their case also goes to the STF. If not in office, no immunity against any crime, so = lower court. Virtually nothing has changed.
Soon the LIAR will demand I prove the building collapsed...what a fool !
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
May 09th, 2018 - 06:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I'm sure JB can link to some articles from Brazil” Then its begs the question, doesn't it.
“So I can safely conclude you both are proven liars.”
http://en.mercopress.com/2018/05/01/lula-da-silva-and-pt-chief-hoffmann-hit-with-fresh-corruption-charges/comments#comment488216
@Terry the ARROGANT LIAR
May 09th, 2018 - 06:44 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ignorant, brainless Terry....always pissing out the pot. Read the below link, if you are capable of understanding it...then, we 'can all safely conclude you are a proven liar.'
http://noticias.bol.uol.com.br/ultimas-noticias/brasil/2018/05/03/cobranca-de-aluguel-em-ocupacao-de-predio-que-desabou.htm
Jack Bauer aka Proof-less and Truth-less
May 09th, 2018 - 07:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Then, we 'can all safely conclude you are a proven liar.” No, we can safely conclude, that you for the first time ever have met your BoP. People are entitled to ask you to verify what you're posting on a public forum. Otherwise, any liar like yourself can make what ever egregious claims they wish without challenge.
@TH
May 09th, 2018 - 07:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Then its begs the question, doesn't it.”
No, it doesn't, ignorante.
“The fallacy of begging the question occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.”
www.txstate.edu/philosophy/resources/fallacy-definitions/Begging-the-Question.html
Now you've seen the evidence, this exactly proves my point. JB was telling the truth about what he read, even though he hadn't given any evidence, and you were wrong to call either of a us a liar.
@JB
I guess it's only noteworthy when you say something similar because you and EM disagree so hard on most things.
Regarding Cuba, I think in Enrique's eyes, Castro implementing communism was a feature not a bug. If you want to remind yourself what he said about Castro, the thread is here:
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/11/26/fidel-castro-has-died-at-the-age-of-90-hero-and-bastard-revolutionary-and-dictator/comments
He wasn't defending Cuban 'democracy', he said this: “And to be clear, the Cuban way is not a desirable way for other countries to follow. Peace and democracy is always preferable.”
I don't want to put words in his mouth, but I certainly see a similarity in the two.
And I thought and hoped the STF's ruling covered all politicians, not just congress. That's very disappointing.
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
May 09th, 2018 - 08:48 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“The fallacy of begging the question occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.” Which is exactly what you stated. It's irrelevant that subsequently your assumption was correct
“The Right Way to Use ”Begs the Question” Begs the question is a term that comes from formal logic. It's a translation of the Latin phrase petitio principii, and it's used to mean that someone has made a conclusion based on a premise that lacks support.“ Which is what you did.
https://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/begs-the-question-update
”...and you were wrong to call either of a us a liar.“ I am entitled to rebut your posting ”@TLiarH“ and your claim via the link ”I don't blindly support him.” Is clearly not true in view of the evidence contradicting his claim. JB most certainly is a consummate liar, as I have revealed numerous times. But, he libels me without evidence, which reconfirms his status as a confirmed liar.
@Hypocrite and Liar
May 09th, 2018 - 09:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You're lying again. I said “There's still nothing about the social movements charging rent to the squatters in the English language press”, and you dishonestly misquoted me by leaving off the 'English language press“ part, implying I said there was nothing anywhere which was a LIE.
Then I corrected you and said JB would be able to give you a link,
which he soon after did, proving me correct and you wrong yet again, which of course you refuse to admit to because you're a LIAR.
There is nothing remotely like begging the question in there. Clearly it is not a fallacy to say JB can give you a link when he then proceeds to do so.
”I am entitled to rebut your posting ”@TLiarH“
You can try, but you can't rebut the truth, so you're never going to succeed. And you libel me without evidence, so what does that make you, hypocrite?
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
May 09th, 2018 - 11:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Since you are British National living in UK the presumption is you're talking about UK press. Omission or not there is no advantage to me either way, or any relevance. I have simply used it as touch-stone for my following statement.
“Then I corrected you and said JB would be able to give you a link” No what you stated is “I'm sure JB can link to some articles from Brazil” So how can you possibly correct me with an event that has not yet occurred?
“You libel me without evidence” “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Christopher Hitchens
“You can't rebut the truth” Why would I need too when it's my best weapon?
Haha, you wouldn't know the truth if it punched you in face. Your best weapon (if you can call it that) is your pigheaded refusal to recognise when you are wrong; after a while people give up on trying to get you to admit the truth because it's impossible. You're just like one of those idiots who claims evolution isn't real and says the proof is that a cat has never given birth to a dog, or something equally irrelevant and absurd.
May 09th, 2018 - 11:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Back on topic, I didn't correct you by saying JB would post, I corrected your misleading quote by pointing out that I only said there was nothing in the English language press, not the press in general. Which being an event in the (very recent) past, was perfectly possible to correct you on. Then I left it to JB to provide the proof of his statements, since it wasn't my BOP and I couldn't be bothered.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
Exactly. You have no evidence for your libel, so I can dismiss it without evidence.
DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
May 09th, 2018 - 11:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“I only said there was nothing in the English language press” What has that got to do with the price of cheese? Your just babbling about some none secular irrelevancy. I see, I dared to raise the spectre that your bosom bud is less than reliable when comes to imparting the truth. Well, tough titty, the truths a bitch, get over it.
As I already explained twice, that was the part of my statement you missed off when you quoted me and dishonestly tried to imply I said it wasn't published anywhere, and which I corrected you on. Now after JB proved you a liar, you're pretending ignorance to avoid admitting you're wrong. Pathetic.
May 09th, 2018 - 11:58 pm - Link - Report abuse 0DemonTree the slavish follower aka The Appendage
May 10th, 2018 - 12:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0“Dishonestly tried to imply I said it wasn't published anywhere” No I did not as your opinion on the matter wasn't of any concern.
“JB proved you a liar” No he didn't, he was begrudgingly forced to comply with his BoP, after I pointed out. “He has so far apparently never indicated any inclination, skill-set, ethical standard to provide more than scuttlebutt from the local bar.”
@Terry the Liar..
May 10th, 2018 - 02:25 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“People are entitled to ask you to verify what you're posting on a public forum...”
WRONG...NOW and AGAIN perhaps, NOT always. Certain things are public knowledge...and if you choose to participate in a public forum, it “should” be safe to presume you are minimally informed, or know where to look for the information yourself. If you aren't, or don't know how to, don't expect to be mouth-fed ; this forum is not an information bureau, but a place to debate ideas and opinions
@DT
Even after defeat, the LIAR clings to his arrogance.
His “but he libels me without evidence” takes the prize. He denies what he has written only a few lines before.
EM and I basically disagree on the honesty of certain politicians, on how to bring sustainable growth to a society, and that it would do no harm in justifying his position and/or answering a few simple questions. Other than that...
Have never been to Cuba, so no first-hand experience, but by what one sees and hears, it’s a stretch to call it a paradise. While Cuba may have managed to offer basic education to all, their 'much-applauded' medical services, while accessible to all, in terms of technology is miles behind the 1st world's, even Brazil’s. Had Chavez gone to the US, or come to Brazil to be treated, he might be alive - but he chose Cuba. The “doctors” brought from Cuba by Dilma, are no more than glorified nurses. Proved by the fact Dilma refused to allow them to be submitted to the OBLIGATORY revalidation exams, demanded of all professionals who graduate abroad (not to mention it was a way for the PT to funnel millions out of Brazil).
Reekie may not have defended Cuban “democracy” but he sure exaggerated his praise to Fidel.
Due to the negative repercussion - as peole always wanted to terminate any kind of privileged status, for everyone - the STF is now raising the possibility of restricting it to 5: prez, VP, prez's of Senate, Lower house & STF, i.e., remove it from the other 38,000.
Jack Bauer aka Proof-less and Truth-less
May 10th, 2018 - 04:38 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“WRONG...NOW and AGAIN perhaps, NOT always. ... you are minimally informed, or know where to look for the information”
I am that's why I always catch you in you in your litany of lies.
@Terry the Liar
May 10th, 2018 - 05:30 pm - Link - Report abuse 0”you are minimally informed, or know where to look for the information” ...(sadly not).
But d'you think you are clever by taking part of my post and presenting it out of context ?
Put “It should be safe to presume” back where it belongs.
If you weren't mentally challenged , I'd think you were just trying to be funny.
@JB
May 10th, 2018 - 07:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“NOW and AGAIN perhaps, NOT always...”
I agree 100%. I suppose Terry's 'challenges' don't allow him to distinguish between a trial, a formal debate, and a discussion on a news site, and which rules are appropriate for each. I wonder if he has problems behaving appropriately in different situations in real life, too?
And I see he's up to his usual tricks of misquoting people. Just another lie.
I don't know much about Cuba, I do know people who have been there but I don't know if EM ever has. Seems to me it's nothing to boast of and I wouldn't be praising Castro, but it would be fairer to compare its levels of democracy, poverty, education and medical services with neighbouring Caribbean islands or other Latin American countries, and several of those are worse off. Still, it's not much of an advert for communism. Castro could have held elections after his revolution instead of making himself leader for life, and the military government in Brazil hardly needed to wait 20 years before handing power back to the civilians, either.
RE the privileges, I hope you're right and they do remove them for (nearly) all. Dealing with local corruption might even be more doable than fighting the federal government.
@DT
May 11th, 2018 - 05:50 pm - Link - Report abuse 0All I can say with regards to your comparison of Cuba to other Caribbean islands, despite the known corruption in the Castro government, is that a long standing authoritarian dictatorship has better means of keeping people under control (supplying only the basic necessitiess), as versus other 3rd world governments, where democracy is still not fully functional...where the political elite too, gets away with murder, also at the expense of the people. Under communism, elections are rigged, your inititiative is worthless, you do as you're told, and do not have the freedom to say, to go where, or to do what you want. Not a price I'd be willing to pay.
The fact the Brazilian military handed back power after only 20 years was not because they were thirsty for power, but because they did not trust the civilians to form an honest, truly democratic government....in retrospect they weren't far off the mark.
I think that now, with the STF prepared to do away with most privileges, for 99% of the politicians, it's just a matter of time before it happens.
Have another reply to send you...
@JB
May 11th, 2018 - 08:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It's not a price I'd be willing to pay either, but then I also wouldn't be willing to pay the price of a military dictatorship, not even the Brazilian one which 'only' killed a few hundred people while some others killed many thousands.
I can see why people at the time were worried about communist takeovers, but in retrospect I think the risk was exaggerated due to cold war paranoia, and not only did the various dictators delay necessary reforms, but some of them were IMO even worse than the communist governments they were avoiding.
Brazil may not have a truly democratic government now, but it's certainly more democratic than having everything run by the military, and disqualifying any candidates who didn't toe the line. And it's not like corruption disappeared during those years either, even if the papers weren't allowed to report it, nor the judges to investigate it.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!