Colombia's Swing Vote is a very interesting analysis of politics in Latin America.
Most pundits don't have a lot to say about Uribe's sweeping victory over the weekend, other than it's an anomaly in a region supposedly swinging left. That misses the point.
Colombia's voters had choices. But they went for Uribe's bold resolve against terror, and for tax cuts, free trade pacts and a no-apologies friendship with the U.S.
Throw in proven leadership, plus a growing and diversified economy, and it was no wonder Uribe had huge appeal. Sixty-two percent of Colombia's voters backed him; just 22% went for his nearest rival. The landslide not only exceeded predictions. It also was bigger than his 54% victory in 2000. And it was the first time in 98 years that anyone has been re-elected president in Colombia.
…..
Changing times and increased globalization have brought out many new political parties in Latin America. But there are three distinct political trends.
There are Reaganesque free marketers such as Uribe, Antonio Saca of El Salvador and, more dimly, Vicente Fox of Mexico.
They seek to end poverty not by ladling soup into every bowl, but by fostering private-sector growth. They are balancing budgets, simplifying rules, forcing transparency, breaking up monopolies and encouraging new businesses.
Sadly, these leaders are often dismissed as "far right" and thus out of touch with "the people." But they keep winning elections. Along with understanding free markets, this group often makes security a priority, based on the legacy of wars as well as citizen revulsion at violent crime. And it is America-friendly.
It also has plenty in common with Latin America's second political trend — toward a soft socialism that's prevailing in Brazil, Uruguay and Chile. Leaders of this movement aren't hostile to the private sector or to fiscal discipline any more than their "right wing" brethren. They focus less, however, on security and more on government spending on things like infrastructure and education.
Not too different, in short, from Bill Clinton or Tony Blair. Both the free-marketers and the soft socialists also overlap in areas such as health care.
The third political force is the anti-democratic populist left led by quasi-dictators like Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and Evo Morales of Bolivia.
This movement hides behind the veneer of socialism, but has virtually nothing in common with it. It equates growth with pork-barrel spending, declares the private sector the enemy, can't distinguish party from government, divides a nation into loyalists and traitors, abuses foreign investors and in the end seeks to collectivize the population into total dependency.
The model here is Fidel Castro's Cuba, and it seemed to have the momentum. Uribe's impressive election, however, is giving the pundits pause.
Leave a Reply