https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v47/n05/tony-wood/why-did-he...
“In 2018, he celebrated Lula’s imprisonment in Brazil on dubious corruption charges, and the following year exulted in the right-wing coup that deposed Evo Morales in Bolivia. Since then he has voiced his support for far-right candidates such as José Antonio Kast in Chile and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil…”
“Dubious” charges against Lula? — He was convicted of accepting a seaside apartment as a bribe for helping the OAS construction company get lucrative deals with state oil firm Petrobras.
Did Lula not do that? The claim is that Lula was targeted to keep him out of the election. Seems exactly the motivation for the various charges against Trump. Are charges dubious only when the right does that against the left? Marine Le Pen is another recent example of “dubious” charges being ok as long as it’s only going left against right.
Also Bolsonaro was termed “far right,” but Lula not called “far left?”
Does anyone actually do any neutral reporting or analysis? It seems that anyone to the right of JFK is “far right” while anyone to the left of Marx is “left leaning.”
More importantly, does anyone care any more? Seems like tribalism has gotten much worse over the past few years. The truth is, in the example of Lula is that is is/was very corrupt, but that he’s a leftist seems to excuse that.
Lula hasn't nationalized industries, hasn't seized wealth, or even tried to, so "far left" doesn't seem to be as fitting. Where are the burnt churches?
Now, about corruption, I'm pretty sure neither shine, but that's Brazil for you. Wasn't the Bolsonaro family found to have bought around 50 properties in cash? Smells about as corrupt as the other side, sadly.
And just because you're opposing a far right extremist like Bolsanaro doesn't make you a far left politician. For example, Le Pen is a far right extremist politician, but Macron is definitely not far left (though Jean-Luc Melanchon, the third place in the previous election, could rightly be called a far left candidate).
> Did Lula not do that?
I'm not an expert and not that knowledgeable about the case but it seems to me the accusation -famously- stated things like "We have no hard proof" (...) "(but) we are convinced he did it"
Again - if the accusation states 'We have no proof', under assumption of innocence, yeah; he "didn't do it"
no, of course not, what a silly question. you think people are falling over themselves to tell you how things are for your sake?
Yes, since nobody yet proved that the apartment was Lula's apartment. And tt was discovered several problems with Lula's charges, which was judged by a person that later was rewarded by Bolsonaro with a job as minister.
> Also Bolsonaro was termed “far right,” but Lula not called “far left?”
Lula is not far left, but center left. He is a social democrat at best, not a communist.
is it also called a bribe when someone pay for it? I think it is called lawfare
> Also Bolsonaro was termed “far right,” but Lula not called “far left?”
Is lula exalting Stalin and trying to install a proletariat dictatorship?
Bolsonaro was such an unbelievably terrible president that The Economist, that infamous right-wing rag (full disclosure: I am a long-time subscriber), endorsed Lula against him in 2018. If you're going to complain "does anyone care any more?" about a loss of common sense in politics, you probably shouldn't pair that complaint with a defense of Jair Bolsonaro, of all people.
I think that you can conspiracize both, or regard both as normal judicial process, but, if you say that it's just fair play against Lula and conspiracy against Trump, then I think that you are just aiming the hypocrisy in the other direction.
Either: "This politician, who received millions of votes is very far right of me (I am very far to the left)."
Or: "I am the center of the left-right spectrum, and this politician who received millions of votes is quite a ways to the right of me (the center), so they are obviously far right."
It's the first one of his books that I read and I remember being completely in awe at his ability to write a novel as if he had a machine that allowed him to look into the minds of anyone at any time or place and then document what he saw.
That novel is about a totalitarian system, that of Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, and it's eerie how I started seeing the little details of human behavior that enable it in the story elsewhere later as well.
Que en paz descanze.
May he rest in peace!
Rest in peace.
He was an extraordinary writer.
I don't mean to be snarky, but, seriously, can't you just pause whenever you want? I understand that the lack of breaks mean that the book doesn't define natural points to pause, but it still seems that one can impose such breaks oneself.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_War_of_the_End_of_the_Wo...
