Democracy (Theory and Philosophy)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Será que Alexandre de Moraes é realmente bom para a democracia?

      by

      Alexandre de Moraes, Ministro do Supremo Tribunal Federal, foi crucial para a transição de poder no Brasil. Mas suas táticas agressivas estão provocando um debate: É possível ir longe demais para combater a extrema-direita?Quando a Polícia Rodoviária Federal começou a impedir a passagem de ônibus cheios de eleitores no dia da eleição, ele ordenou que parassem.Quando vozes da direita espalharam a alegação infundada de que a eleição no Brasil foi roubada, ele ordenou que fossem banidas das redes sociais.E quando milhares de manifestantes da direita invadiram as sedes dos três poderes neste mês, ele ordenou que autoridades responsáveis pela segurança fossem presas.Alexandre de Moraes, Ministro do Supremo Tribunal Federal, assumiu o papel de principal defensor da democracia brasileira. Usando uma interpretação ampla dos poderes do Tribunal, Moraes impulsionou investigações e processos, bem como o silenciamento nas redes sociais, de qualquer pessoa considerada por ele uma ameaça às instituições brasileiras.Como resultado, diante dos ataques antidemocráticos do ex-presidente de extrema direita do Brasil, Jair Bolsonaro, e de seus apoiadores, Moraes abriu caminho para a transição de poder. Para muitos da esquerda brasileira, isso fez dele o homem que salvou a jovem democracia brasileira.No entanto, para muitos outros no Brasil, ele a ameaça. A abordagem agressiva e a expansão da autoridade de Moraes fizeram dele uma das pessoas mais poderosas do país, e também o colocaram no centro de um debate complicado no Brasil sobre até que ponto se pode ir para lutar contra a extrema-direita.Danos causados ao Supremo Tribunal Federal por manifestantes da direita. Alexandre de Moraes ordenou a prisão de autoridades responsáveis pela segurança.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesAlexandre de Moraes já ordenou prisões sem julgamento por ameaças postadas em redes sociais; liderou o voto que sentenciou um deputado federal a quase nove anos de prisão por ameaçar o Tribunal; ordenou busca e apreensão contra empresários com poucas evidências de irregularidades; suspendeu um governador eleito de seu cargo; e bloqueou monocraticamente dezenas de contas e milhares de publicações nas redes sociais, praticamente sem transparência ou espaço para recurso.Na sua caça em nome da justiça após o tumulto deste mês, Moraes se tornou mais audacioso. Suas ordens para banir vozes influentes online se proliferaram, e, agora, ele colocou o homem acusado de atiçar as chamas extremistas do Brasil, Bolsonaro, sob sua mira. Na semana passada, Moraes incluiu o ex-presidente na investigação federal do tumulto, da qual é o relator, sugerindo que o ex-presidente tenha inspirado a violência.Suas ações se encaixam em uma tendência mais ampla da Suprema Corte brasileira de aumentar o próprio poder — tomando o que os críticos chamam de um rumo mais repressivo no processo.Vários juristas e analistas políticos agora discutem que impacto Moraes terá a longo prazo. Alguns argumentam que as suas ações são medidas extraordinárias, mas necessárias diante de uma ameaça extraordinária. Outros dizem que, agindo sob a bandeira da salvaguarda da democracia, Moraes está, em vez disso, prejudicando o equilíbrio de poder no país.“Não podemos desrespeitar a democracia para protegê-la”, disse Irapuã Santana, advogado e colunista jurídico do jornal O Globo, um dos maiores do Brasil.Santana votou em Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, o novo presidente da esquerda, em outubro, mas disse temer que muitos no Brasil estejam apoiando Moraes sem considerar as possíveis consequências. “Hoje ele está fazendo isso contra o nosso ‘inimigo’. Amanhã ele está fazendo isso contra o nosso amigo — ou contra nós”, disse. “É um precedente perigoso.”Milly Lacombe, uma comentarista da esquerda, disse que tais preocupações ignoram um perigo maior, evidenciado pelos tumultos e um complô frustrado de atentado à bomba para perturbar a posse de Lula. Ela argumentou, em sua coluna no site de notícias UOL, que a extrema direita apresenta graves perigos para a democracia brasileira, o que deve ofuscar as preocupações com liberdade de expressão ou excesso judicial.“Sob ameaça de uma insurreição de inspiração nazi-fascista vale suprimir temporariamente liberdades individuais em nome da liberdade coletiva?” escreveu. “Eu diria que sim.”O ex-presidente de direita, Jair Bolsonaro, há muito tempo acusa Alexandre de Moraes de exceder sua autoridade e tentou um impeachment contra o Ministro.Dado Galdieri for The New York TimesA disputa ilustra um debate global mais amplo, não apenas sobre o poder do Judiciário, mas também sobre como lidar com a desinformação nas redes sem silenciar vozes dissidentes.O proprietário do Twitter, Elon Musk, ponderou que os movimentos de Moraes foram “extremamente preocupantes.” Glenn Greenwald, um jornalista americano que vive no Brasil há anos e crítico de certas regras das redes sociais, participou de um debate nesta semana com um sociólogo brasileiro sobre as ações de Moraes. E as autoridades brasileiras sugeriram que poderiam considerar novas leis para determinar o que pode ser dito nas redes.Alexandre de Moraes tem recusado pedidos de entrevista há mais de um ano. O Supremo Tribunal Federal, em nota, disse que as investigações de Moraes e muitas de suas ordens foram endossadas por toda a Corte e “são absolutamente constitucionais.”Nas horas seguintes ao tumulto em Brasília, Moraes afastou o governador do Distrito Federal, responsável pela segurança do protesto que se tornou violento, e depois ordenou a prisão de dois agentes de segurança do Distrito Federal.Ainda assim, há pouco apoio no Supremo Tribunal Federal para prender Bolsonaro, devido à insuficiência das provas e temores de que uma prisão provocaria novos conflitos. De acordo com um alto funcionário do Supremo Tribunal Federal que falou sob condição de anonimato para discutir conversas privadas, diversos ministros da corte preferem tentar condenar Bolsonaro por abuso de poder no Tribunal Superior Eleitoral, o que o tornaria inelegível por oito anos.Bolsonaro, que está na Flórida desde 30 de dezembro, há muito tempo acusa Moraes de exceder sua autoridade e tentou um impeachment contra o Ministro. O advogado de Bolsonaro disse que ele sempre respeitou a democracia e repudiou os tumultos.Moraes, de 54 anos, tem décadas de atuação como promotor público, advogado e professor de Direito Constitucional.O Ministro foi nomeado para o Supremo Tribunal Federal em 2017, uma medida condenada pela esquerda porque ele estava alinhado com partidos da centro-direita.Alexandre de Moraes com o Presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva no mês passado.Andre Borges/EPA, via ShutterstockEm 2019, o então presidente do Supremo Tribunal Federal emitiu uma portaria de uma página autorizando a Corte a instaurar seus próprios inquéritos ao invés de aguardar outras autoridades. Para o Tribunal — que, ao contrário da Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos, processa dezenas de milhares de casos por ano, incluindo certos casos criminais — essa foi uma expansão drástica de sua jurisdição.O presidente da Corte designou Moraes para iniciar o primeiro inquérito: uma investigação sobre “fake news”. O primeiro passo de Moraes foi ordenar a uma revista que retirasse do ar uma reportagem que ligava o presidente da Corte a uma investigação sobre corrupção. (Ordem que revogou quando a revista mostrou provas.)Moraes então mudou o foco das investigações para a desinformação nas redes, principalmente vinda dos apoiadores de Jair Bolsonaro, o que deu a ele um enorme papel na política brasileira. Papel que cresceu ainda mais este ano, quando, por acaso, seu revezamento como presidente do Tribunal Superior Eleitoral coincidiu com a eleição.Nessa função, Alexandre de Moraes se tornou o maior guardião — e cão de guarda — da democracia brasileira. Antes da eleição, Moraes fez um acordo com os militares para realizar testes adicionais em urnas eletrônicas. No dia da eleição, ordenou que a Polícia Rodoviária Federal explicasse por que os policiais estavam parando ônibus cheios de eleitores. E, na noite da eleição, Moraes convidou os líderes da República para que anunciassem o vencedor em conjunto, uma demonstração de unidade contra qualquer tentativa de perpetuação no poder.No meio desse grupo de líderes estava o próprio Alexandre de Moraes. O Ministro fez um discurso contundente sobre o valor da democracia, provocando cantos de “Xandão”.“Espero que, a partir dessa eleição”, disse, “finalmente cessem as agressões ao sistema eleitoral.”Elas não cessaram. Manifestantes da direita protestaram em frente aos quartéis, pedindo aos militares que revogassem a eleição. Em resposta, Moraes ordenou que empresas de tecnologia suspendessem mais contas, de acordo com um advogado sênior de uma grande empresa de tecnologia, que falou sob condição de anonimato por medo de irritar o Ministro.Apoiadores de Jair Bolsonaro protestam em frente ao quartel do Exército em São Paulo para pedir intervenção militar após eleições em novembro.Victor Moriyama for The New York TimesEntre as contas que Moraes ordenou que fossem retiradas estão as de pelo menos cinco parlamentares federais, um empresário bilionário e mais de uma dezena de influenciadores da direita, incluindo um dos apresentadores de podcast mais populares do país.As ordens de Moraes para remover contas não especificam o motivo, de acordo com o advogado e uma cópia de uma ordem obtida pelo New York Times. Acessos a contas proibidas no Twitter levam a uma página em branco e uma mensagem contundente: “a conta foi retida no Brasil em resposta a uma exigência legal.” Os donos das contas são simplesmente informados de que estão suspensas devido a uma ordem judicial e que devem considerar entrar em contato com um advogado.O advogado disse que sua empresa de tecnologia entrou com recursos contra ordens que considera excessivamente amplas, mas eles foram negados por Moraes. Os recursos ao Plenário do STF também foram negados ou ignorados, disse.Procuradas pela reportagem, várias redes sociais se recusaram a comentar o assunto publicamente. Moraes é uma potencial ameaça para os seus negócios no Brasil. No ano passado, Moraes baniu brevemente o Telegram no país após a empresa não cumprir suas ordens.Recentemente houve conversas entre alguns ministros do STF sobre a necessidade de pôr fim aos inquéritos de Moraes, de acordo com a fonte do tribunal, mas após o tumulto de 8 de janeiro, esses comentários cessaram. O tumulto aumentou o apoio a Moraes entre seus pares, de acordo com o alto funcionário da Corte.Beatriz Rey, cientista política da Universidade Estadual do Rio de Janeiro, disse que a abordagem de Moraes, embora não ideal, se faz necessária porque outros poderes do governo, especialmente o Legislativo, não cumpriram seu dever.“Você não deveria ter um Ministro combatendo ameaças à democracia repetidas vezes,” disse. “Mas o problema é que o próprio sistema está funcionando mal neste momento.”André Spigariol More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      ‘You Don’t Negotiate With These Kinds of People’

      by

      Over the past eight years, the Republican Party has been transformed from a generally staid institution representing the allure of low taxes, conservative social cultural policies and laissez-faire capitalism into a party of blatant chaos and disruption.The shift has been evident in many ways — at the presidential level, as the party nominated Donald Trump not once but twice and has been offered the chance to do so a third time; in Trump’s — and Trump’s allies’ — attempt to overturn the 2020 election results; in his spearheading of the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol; and most recently in the brutal series of votes from Jan. 3 to Jan. 7 in the House of Representatives, where 20 hard-right members held Kevin McCarthy hostage until he cried uncle and was finally elected speaker.What drives the members of the Freedom Caucus, who have wielded the threat of dysfunction to gain a level of control within the House far in excess of their numbers? How has this group moved from the margins to the center of power in less than a decade?Since its founding in 2015, this cadre has acquired a well-earned reputation for using high-risk tactics to bring down two House speakers, John Boehner and Paul Ryan. During the five-day struggle over McCarthy’s potential speakership, similar pressure tactics wrested crucial agenda-setting authority from the Republican leadership in the House.“You don’t negotiate with these kinds of people,” Representative Mike Rogers, Republican of Alabama and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, declared as the saga unfolded. “These are legislative terrorists.”“We have grifters in our midst,” Representative Dan Crenshaw, Republican of Texas, told the Texas Liberty Alliance PAC.One of the key factors underlying the extremism among Republicans in the House and their election denialism — which has confounded American politics since it erupted in 2020 — is racial tension, not always explicit but nonetheless omnipresent, captured in part by the growing belief that white Americans will soon be in the minority.As Jack Balkin of Yale Law School noted, “The defenders of the old order have every incentive to resist the emergence of a new regime until the bitter end.”In his paper “Public Opinion Roots of Election Denialism,” published on Jan. 6, the second anniversary of the storming of the Capitol, Charles Stewart III, a political scientist at M.I.T., argues that “among Republicans, conspiracism has a potent effect on embracing election denialism, followed by racial resentment.”According to Stewart’s calculations, “a Republican at the 10th percentile of the conspiracism scale has a 55.7 percent probability of embracing election denialism, compared to a Republican at the 90th percentile, at 86.6 percent, over 30 points higher. A Republican at the 10th percentile on the racial resentment scale has a 59.4 percent probability of embracing denialism, compared to 83.2 percent for a Republican at the 90th percentile on the same scale.”In other words, the two most powerful factors driving Republicans who continue to believe that Trump actually won the 2020 election are receptivity to conspiracy thinking and racial resentment.“The most confirmed Republican denialists,” Stewart writes, “believe that large malevolent forces are at work in world events, racial minorities are given too much deference in society and America’s destiny is a Christian one.”Along parallel lines, Neil Siegel, a law professor at Duke, argues in his 2021 article “The Trump Presidency, Racial Realignment and the Future of Constitutional Norms,” that Donald Trump “is more of an effect than a cause of larger racial and cultural changes in American society that are causing Republican voters and politicians to perceive an existential threat to their continued political and cultural power — and, relatedly, to deny the legitimacy of their political opponents.”In this climate, Siegel continues, “It is very unlikely that Republican politicians will respect constitutional norms when they deem so much to be at stake in each election and significant governmental decision.”These developments draw attention to some of the psychological factors driving politics and partisan competition.In a 2020 paper, “Dark Necessities? Candidates’ Aversive Personality Traits and Negative Campaigning in the 2018 American Midterms,” Alessandro Nai and Jürgen Maier, political scientists at the University of Amsterdam and the University of Koblenz-Landau in Germany, argue that the role of subclinical “psychopathy” is significant in the behavior of a growing number of elected officials:Psychopaths usually show “a cognitive bias towards perceiving hostile intent from others” and are impulsive, prone to callous social attitudes, and show a strong proclivity for interpersonal antagonism. Individuals high in psychopathy do not possess the ability to recognize or accept the existence of antisocial behaviors, and thus should be expected to more naturally adopt a more confrontational, antagonistic and aggressive style of political competition. Individuals high in psychopathy have been shown to have more successful trajectories in politics. They are furthermore often portrayed as risk-oriented agents. In this sense, we could expect individuals that score high in psychopathy to make a particularly strong use of attacks, regardless of the risk of backlash effects.Narcissism, Nai and Maier continue,has been shown to predict more successful political trajectories, also due to the prevalence of social dominance intrinsic in the trait. Narcissism is, furthermore, linked to overconfidence and deceit and hyper competitiveness, which could explain why narcissists are more likely to engage in angry/aggressive behaviors and general incivility in their workplace. Narcissism is furthermore linked to reckless behavior and risk-taking and thus individuals high in this trait are expected to disregard the risk of backlash effects.Nai and Maier also refer to a character trait they consider politically relevant, Machiavellianism, which they describe as havingan aggressive and malicious side. People high in Machiavellianism are “characterized by cynical and misanthropic beliefs, callousness, a striving for argentic goals (i.e., money, power, and status), and the use of calculating and cunning manipulation tactics,” and in general tend to display a malevolent behavior intended to “seek control over others.”In an email, Nai argued that structural and ideological shifts have opened the door to “a greater tolerance and preference for political aggressiveness.” First, there is the rise of populism, which “strongly relies on a very aggressive stance against established elites, with a more aggressive style and rhetoric.”“Populists,” Nai added, “are very peculiar political animals, happy to engage in more aggressive rhetoric to push the boundaries of normality. This helps them getting under the spotlight, and explains why they seem to have a much greater visibility (and perhaps power) than they numerically should.”Second, Nai contended thata case can be made that contemporary politics is the realm of politicians with a harsh and uncompromising personality (callousness, narcissism, and even Machiavellianism). Trump, Bolsonaro, Duterte, all share a rather “nasty” character, which seems indicative of a contemporary preference for uncompromising and aggressive leaders. Such political aggressiveness (populism, negativity, incivility, dark personality) is perfectly in character for a political system characterized with high polarization and extreme dislike for political opponents.Other scholars emphasize the importance of partisan polarization, anti-elitism and the rise of social media in creating a political environment in which extremists can thrive.“There are likely a few factors at play here,” Jay Van Bavel, a professor of psychology and neural science at N.Y.U., wrote by email. “The first is that ideologically extreme people tend to be more dogmatic — especially people who are on the far right.”He cited a 2021 national survey that he and Elizabeth Harris, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Pennsylvania, conducted that “found that conservatism and ideological extremity both contributed to an unwillingness to compromise.”The members of the Freedom Caucus, Van Bavel noted,tend to be ideologically extreme conservatives which makes them very good candidates for this type of rigid and extreme thinking. We also found that politically extreme individuals were more likely to have a sense of belief superiority. These traits help explain why this group is very unwilling to cooperate or strike a political compromise.Three years ago, I wrote a column for The Times about a segment of the electorate — and a faction of elected officials — driven by “a need for chaos,” based on the work of Michael Bang Petersen and Mathias Osmundsen, political scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark, and Kevin Arceneaux, a political scientist at Sciences Po in Paris. Since then, the three, joined by Timothy B. Gravelle, Jason Reifler and Thomas J. Scotto, have updated their work in a 2021 paper, “Some People Just Want to Watch the World Burn: The Prevalence, Psychology and Politics of the ‘Need for Chaos.’”In their new paper, they argue:Some people may be motivated to seek out chaos because they want to rebuild society, while others enjoy destruction for its own sake. We demonstrate that chaos-seekers are not a unified political group but a divergent set of malcontents. Multiple pathways can lead individuals to “want to watch the world burn.”The distinction between those seeking chaos to fulfill destructive impulses and those seeking chaos in order to rebuild the system is crucial, according to the authors:The finding that thwarted status-desires drive a Need for Chaos, which then activates support for political protest and violence, suggests that a Need for Chaos may be a key driver of societal change, both currently and historically. While some simply want to “watch the world burn,” others want to the see a new world rebuilt from the ashes.There are, the authors continue,both nihilists and those who have a purpose. Nonetheless, owing to the destructive force of a high Need for Chaos, one of the key challenges of contemporary societies is indeed to meet, recognize and, to the extent possible, alleviate the frustrations of these individuals. The alternative is a trail of nihilistic destruction.In a more recent paper, published last year, “The ‘Need for Chaos’ and Motivations to Share Hostile Political Rumors,” Petersen, Osmundsen and Arceneaux found that the need for chaos “is significantly higher among participants who readily take risks to obtain status and among participants who feel lonely.” At the extreme, the need surpasses partisanship: “For chaos-seekers, political sympathies toward political parties appear to matter little for sharing decisions; instead, what matters is that rumors can be used as an instrument to mobilize against the entire political establishment.”The authors found that “the need for chaos is most strongly associated with worries about losing one’s own position in the social hierarchy and — to a lesser, but still significant extent — the perception that one is personally being kept back from climbing the social status ladder,” noting that “white men react more aggressively than any other group to perceived status challenges.”Van Bavel wrote by email that instead of focusing on a need for chaos, he believes “it might be simpler to assume that they are simply indifferent to chaos in the service of dogmatism. You see some of this on the far left — but we found that it simply doesn’t reach the same extremes as the far right.”Van Bavel pointed to the structural aspects of the contemporary political system that reward the adoption of extreme stances:In the immediate political context, where there is extremely high polarization driven by partisan animosity, there are strong social media incentives to take extreme stances, and an unwillingness for moderate Republicans to break ranks and strike a compromise with Democrats. In this context, the Freedom Caucus can get away with dogmatic behavior without many serious consequences. Indeed, it might even benefit their national profile, election prospects, and fund-raising success.Along similar lines, Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at N.Y.U., stressedthe rapid change in audience and incentives that social media has engineered for congresspeople. The case of Ted Cruz, caught checking his mentions as he sat down from giving a speech on the Senate floor, is illustrative. Why is he making himself so responsive to strangers on Twitter, rather than to his constituents, or to his colleagues in the Senate?Haidt wrote by email that he agrees with Yuval Levin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, that:Social media has contributed to the conversion of our major institutions from formative (they shape character) to performative (they are platforms on which influencers can perform to please and grow their audiences). When we add in the “primary problem” — that few congressional races are competitive, so all that matters is the primary, which gives outsized influence to politically extreme voters — we have both a road into Congress for social media influencers and the ultimate platform for their performances.Plus, Haidt added:The influence economy may give them financial and career independence; once they are famous, they don’t need to please their party’s leadership. They’ll have opportunities for money and further influence even if they leave Congress.Leanne ten Brinke, a professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia, wrote by email:My research on power and politics focuses on the role of psychopathic personality traits, which is characterized by callousness, manipulation/coercion, impulsivity, and a desire for dominance. When people think of psychopathy they often think of criminals or serial killers, but these traits exist on a continuum, so people can be “high” in these traits without meeting any kind of clinical cutoff, and it will impact the way they move through the world. People with high levels of these traits tend to gravitate toward powerful roles in society to fulfill that desire for dominance and to bully others when in these roles.Brinke noted that she has “no data on the personalities of those in the House Freedom Caucus,” but in “previous research we actually found that U.S. senators who display behaviors consistent with psychopathy were more likely to get elected (they are great competitors!) but are less likely to garner co-sponsors on their bills (they are terrible cooperators!).” In addition, Brinke continued, “they enjoy having power over others, but don’t use it to make legislative progress. They tend to be more self-interested than other-interested.”In a separate 2020 paper, “Light and Dark Trait Subtypes of Human Personality,” by Craig S. Neumann, Scott Barry Kaufman, David Bryce Yaden, Elizabeth Hyde, Eli Tsukayama and Brinke, the authors find:The light subtype evidenced affiliative interpersonal functioning and greater trust in others, as well as higher life satisfaction and positive self-image. The dark subtype reflected interpersonal dominance, competitiveness, and aggression. In both general population samples, the dark trait subtype was the least prevalent. However, in a third sample of U.S. senators (N =143), based on observational data, the dark subtype was most prevalent and associated with longer tenure in political office, though less legislative success.In a separate 2019 paper, “The Light vs. Dark Triad of Personality: Contrasting Two Very Different Profiles of Human Nature,” Kaufman, Yaden, Hyde and Tsukayama wrote that dark personalities are “not associated with exclusively adverse and transgressive psychosocial outcomes” and may, instead, “be considered adaptive.”Those with the more forbidding personal characteristics “showed positive correlations with a variety of variables that could facilitate one’s more agentic-related goals” and they “positively correlated with utilitarian moral judgment and creativity, bravery, and leadership, as well as assertiveness, in addition to motives for power, achievement, and self-enhancement.”In contrast, more sunny and cooperative dispositions were “correlated with greater ‘reaction formation,’ which consisted of the following items: ‘If someone mugged me and stole my money, I’d rather he be helped than punished’ and ‘I often find myself being very nice to people who by all rights I should be angry at.’ While having such ‘lovingkindness’ even for one’s enemies is conducive to one’s own well-being, these attitudes” could potentially make these people “more open to exploitation and emotional manipulation.”In March 2022, Richard Pildes, a law professor at N.Y.U., warned in “Political Fragmentation in Democracies of the West”:The decline of effective government throughout most Western democracies poses one of the greatest challenges democracy currently confronts. The importance of effective government receives too little attention in democratic and legal theory, yet the inability to deliver effective government can lead citizens to alienation, distrust, and withdrawal from participation, and worse, to endorse authoritarian leaders who promise to cut through the dysfunctions of democratic governments.For the Republican Party, the empowerment of the Freedom Caucus will face its first major test of viability this month. According to Janet Yellen, secretary of the Treasury, the United States will hit the $31.4 trillion statutory debt limit on Jan. 19. The Treasury, she continued, would then be forced to adopt stringent cash-management procedures that could put off default until June.At the moment, House Republicans, under pressure from the Freedom Caucus, are demanding that legislation raising the debt ceiling be accompanied by sharp spending cuts. That puts them at loggerheads with the Biden administration and many members of the Senate Democratic majority, raising the possibility of a government shutdown.In other words, the takeover of the Republican Party by politicians either participating in or acceding to tribalism and chaos has the clear potential in coming weeks to put the entire nation at risk.Looking past the debt ceiling to the 2024 elections, Richard L. Hasen, a law professor at U.C.L.A., writes in the April 2022 Harvard Law Review:The United States faces a serious risk that the 2024 presidential election, and other future U.S. elections, will not be conducted fairly and that the candidates taking office will not reflect the free choices made by eligible voters under previously announced election rules. The potential mechanisms by which election losers may be declared election winners are: (1) usurpation of voter choices for president by state legislatures purporting to exercise constitutional authority, possibly with the blessing of a partisan Supreme Court and the acquiescence of Republicans in Congress; (2) fraudulent or suppressive election administration or vote counting by law- or norm-breaking election officials; and (3) violent or disruptive private action that prevents voting, interferes with the counting of votes, or interrupts the assumption of power by the actual winning candidate.What, one has to ask, does this constant brinkmanship and playing to the gallery do to democracy generally?The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 75 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Your Wednesday Briefing: China’s Dual Crises

      by

      Last year, China’s economy had one of its worst performances in decades. Its population is also shrinking.Together with Japan and South Korea, China has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world.Qilai Shen for The New York TimesChina’s twin crisesAt the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, China sought to reassure the world that its economy was back on track. A delegation told world leaders that business could return to normal now that the country has relaxed its “zero Covid” policy.But China’s projected resilience does not align with two major revelations about its long-term health and stability.Yesterday, China revealed that its economy had just had one of its worst performances since 1976, the year Mao Zedong died. Its economy grew by just 3 percent, far short of its 5.5 percent target.Perhaps more consequential, China also revealed that its population had shrunk last year for the first time since the Great Leap Forward, Mao’s failed economic experiment.In the population data, experts see major implications for China, its economy and the world. Births in China have fallen for years, and officials have fought to reverse the trend. They have loosened the one-child policy and offered incentives to encourage families to have children. Those policies did not work. Now, some experts think the decline may be irreversible.A shrinking Chinese population means that the country will face labor shortages in the absence of enough people of working age to fuel its growth. By 2035, 400 million people in China are expected to be over 60, nearly a third of its population. That will have major implications for the global economy; the country has been the engine of world growth for decades.Context: The problem is not limited to China. Many developed countries are aging, and toward the middle of this century, deaths will start to exceed births worldwide. The shift is already starting to transform societies. In East Asia, people are working well into their 70s, and in France, an effort to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64 is expected to expose older workers to hiring discrimination.Opinion: China’s population decline creates two major economic challenges, writes Paul Krugman. The state pension system will struggle to handle the unbalanced ratio of older adults to the working population. And the decline may harm China’s overall productivity.Olena Zelenska pressed leaders at Davos to support Ukraine.Gian Ehrenzeller/EPA, via ShutterstockThe Ukraine war dominates at DavosThe war in Ukraine is taking center stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, as Ukraine pushes for more aid and advanced weapons from the West.Olena Zelenska, Ukraine’s first lady, is there in person. Yesterday, she called on world leaders and others at the forum to use their influence to help Ukraine. She also outlined the 10-point peace plan that her husband, President Volodymyr Zelensky, announced last fall, which includes Russia’s complete withdrawal.Pressure is now growing on Germany to export its main battle tank to Ukraine, or allow other countries to do so. Poland and Finland are waiting for Germany’s approval to send the German tanks, which could help Ukraine better defend itself against Russian aerial attacks and take the initiative along the front line in the east.The State of the WarDnipro: A Russian strike on an apartment complex in the central Ukrainian city was one of the deadliest for civilians away from the front line since the war began. The attack prompted renewed calls for Moscow to be charged with war crimes.Western Military Aid: Britain indicated that it would give battle tanks to Ukrainian forces to help prepare them for anticipated Russian assaults this spring, adding to the growing list of powerful Western weapons being sent Ukraine’s way that were once seen as too provocative.Soledar: The Russian military and the Wagner Group, a private mercenary group, contradicted each other publicly about who should get credit for capturing the eastern town. Ukraine’s military, meanwhile, has rejected Russia’s claim of victory, saying its troops are still fighting there.What’s next: The dispute over German-made tanks should be resolved by the end of the week. Vocal U.S. support could help sway Germany. Yesterday, a senior NATO official said that Britain’s recent announcement that it would send 14 tanks to Ukraine was making Germany’s reluctance untenable.Context: Ukraine and its allies are growing more worried that there is only a short window to prepare for a possible Russian offensive in the spring.Elsewhere: The Australian Open banned Belarusian and Russian flags yesterday. It has allowed tennis players from those countries to compete, but not as representatives of their country.Brayan Apaza, 15, is the youngest person who was killed in the protests.Federico Rios Escobar for The New York Times.A referendum on Peru’s democracyProtests in rural Peru that began more than a month ago over the ouster of the former president, Pedro Castillo, have grown in size and in the scope of demonstrators’ demands.The unrest is now far broader than anger over who is running the country. Instead, it represents a profound frustration with the country’s young democracy, which demonstrators say has deepened the country’s vast inequalities.At first, protesters mainly sought timely new elections or Castillo’s reinstatement. But now at least 50 people have died, and protesters are demanding a new constitution and even, as one sign put it, “to refound a new nation.”“This democracy is no longer a democracy,” they chant as they block streets.Background: Peru returned to democracy just two decades ago, after the authoritarian rule of Alberto Fujimori. The current system, based on a Fujimori-era Constitution, is rife with corruption, impunity and mismanagement.Context: The crisis reflects an erosion of trust in democracies across Latin America, fueled by states that “violate citizens’ rights, fail to provide security and quality public services and are captured by powerful interests,” according to The Journal of Democracy. Just 21 percent of Peruvians are satisfied with their democracy, according to one study. Only Haiti fares worse in Latin America.THE LATEST NEWSAsia PacificMursal Nabizada was one of a few female legislators who stayed in Afghanistan after the Taliban seized power. Wakil Kohsar/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA former Afghan lawmaker was fatally shot at her home in Kabul. No one has been arrested, and it was unclear whether it was a politically motivated murder or a family conflict.New Zealand is facing an egg shortage. One reason is a decade-old disagreement about how to farm poultry.Vietnam’s president resigned yesterday after he was found responsible for a series of corruption scandals, The Associated Press reports.Around the WorldArmed insurgents kidnapped 50 women in Burkina Faso, which has been battling a jihadist insurgency since 2015.Britain’s government blocked a new Scottish law that made it easier for people to legally change their gender.Experts think European inflation has probably peaked, after an unusually warm winter drove down gas prices.Science TimesSome 130,000 babies get infected with H.I.V. each year in sub-Saharan Africa.Malin Fezehai for The New York TimesEfforts to treat adults for H.I.V. have been a major success across sub-Saharan Africa. But many infections in children are undetected and untreated.Dolphins can shout underwater. But a new study suggests that underwater noise made by humans could make it harder for them to communicate and work together.The rate of big scientific breakthroughs may have fallen since 1945. Analysts say that today’s discoveries are more incremental.A Morning ReadPrincess Martha Louise of Norway stepped away from her royal duties last year to focus on her alternative medicine business.Lise AserudThe British aren’t the only ones with royal drama. Thailand, Norway, Denmark and Spain have zany monarchies, too.ARTS AND IDEAS“The Reading Party,” painted in 1735 by Jean-François de Troy, was sold for $3.6 million last month. Christie’sTough times for the old mastersThe art market, like pretty much everything else in our culture, has become all about the here and now. European paintings from before 1850 were once a bedrock of the market. But now, works by the old masters make up just 4 percent of sales at Sotheby’s and Christie’s.Instead, buyers increasingly want works by living artists. Last year, Sotheby’s, Christie’s and Phillips offered works by a record 670 “NextGen” artists, who are under 45. A January report found that their art grossed more than $300 million. Experts say that younger collectors often regard art from the distant past as remote and irrelevant, and contemporary art reflects the fast-forward cultural preoccupations of our society. There may also be a financial incentive: Works by younger, Instagram-lauded artists are routinely “flipped” at auction for many multiples of their original gallery prices.Related: A new book, “The Status Revolution,” argues that class signifiers have flipped. The lowbrow has supplanted luxury as a sign of prestige.PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookArmando Rafael for The New York Times. Food Stylist: Simon Andrews. Prop Stylist: Paige Hicks.Instant pistachio pudding mix is the secret to this moist Bundt cake.How to NegotiateThere is an art to asking for a raise.HealthIs it bad to drink coffee on an empty stomach?FashionHere’s how to choose the perfect work T-shirt.Now Time to PlayPlay the Mini Crossword, and a clue: Whole bunch (four letters).Here are the Wordle and the Spelling Bee.You can find all our puzzles here.That’s it for today’s briefing. See you next time. — AmeliaP.S. Adrienne Carter, who has led our newsroom in Asia since 2019, will be the next Europe editor. Congratulations, Adrienne!“The Daily” is on China’s “zero Covid” pivot.We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to briefing@nytimes.com. More

    • 75 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Así comenzó el ataque en Brasilia

      by

      Mientras el autobús se dirigía desde el corazón agrícola de Brasil a la capital, Andrea Barth sacó su teléfono para preguntar a sus compañeros de viaje, uno por uno, qué pensaban hacer cuando llegaran.“Derrocar a los ladrones”, respondió un hombre.“Sacar al ‘Nueve Dedos’“, dijo otro, en referencia al presidente de izquierda de Brasil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, quien hace décadas perdió parte de un dedo en un accidente de trabajo sucedido en una fábrica.Mientras los pasajeros describían sus planes de violencia, más de cien autobuses llenos de simpatizantes de Jair Bolsonaro, el expresidente de extrema derecha, también descendían en Brasilia, la capital.Video posted on social media shows dozens of supporters of Jair Bolsonaro arriving in Brasília by bus.Jakelyne Loiola, via TwitterUn día después, el 8 de enero, una turba pro-Bolsonaro desató un caos que conmocionó al país y que dio la vuelta al mundo. Los agitadores invadieron y saquearon el Congreso, el Supremo Tribunal Federal y el palacio de gobierno del país, con la intención, según muchos de ellos, de incitar a los líderes militares a derrocar a Lula, quien había asumido el cargo una semana antes.El ataque caótico tuvo un parecido inquietante con el asalto al Capitolio de Estados Unidos el 6 de enero de 2021: cientos de manifestantes de derecha, alegando que una elección estuvo amañada, entraron a los pasillos del poder.Ambos episodios impactaron a dos de las democracias más grandes del mundo, y casi dos años después del ataque de Estados Unidos, el asalto del domingo de hace un par de semanas mostró que el extremismo de extrema derecha, inspirado por líderes antidemocráticos e impulsado por teorías de la conspiración, sigue siendo una grave amenaza.Lula y las autoridades judiciales actuaron con rapidez para recuperar el control y detuvieron a más de 1150 alborotadores, desalojaron los campamentos donde se refugiaron, buscaron a sus financiadores y organizadores y, el viernes de la semana pasada, abrieron una investigación sobre cómo Bolsonaro pudo haberlos inspirado.The New York Times habló con las autoridades, servidores públicos, testigos y participantes en las protestas y revisó decenas de videos y cientos de publicaciones en las redes sociales para reconstruir lo sucedido. El resultado de la investigación muestra que una turba superó con rapidez y sin esfuerzo a la policía.También muestra que algunos agentes de la policía no solo no actuaron contra los alborotadores, sino que parecían simpatizar con ellos, ya que se dedicaron a tomar fotos mientras la turba destruía el Congreso. Un hombre que fue a ver qué estaba pasando dijo que la policía simplemente le indicó que se dirigiera a los disturbios.El desequilibrio entre los manifestantes y la policía sigue siendo uno de los puntos centrales de la investigación de las autoridades y las entrevistas con los agentes de seguridad han generado acusaciones de negligencia grave e incluso de complicidad activa en el caos. Tras los disturbios, las autoridades federales suspendieron al gobernador responsable de la protección de los edificios públicos y detuvieron a dos altos funcionarios de seguridad que trabajaban para él. More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      How a Mob Tried to Oust Brazil’s Lula

      by

      As the bus made its way from Brazil’s agricultural heartland to the capital, Andrea Barth pulled out her phone to ask fellow passengers, one by one, what they intended to do once they arrived.“Overthrow the thieves,” one man replied.“Take out ‘Nine-Finger,’” said another, referring to Brazil’s leftist president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who lost part of a finger decades ago in a factory accident.“You might escape a lightning strike,” another man said, as if confronting Mr. Lula himself. “But you won’t escape me.”As the passengers described their plans for violence, more than a hundred other buses bulging with supporters of Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right former president, were also descending on Brasília, the capital.Video posted on social media shows dozens of Bolsonaro supporters arriving in Brasília by bus.Jakelyne Loiola, via TwitterA day later, on Jan. 8, a pro-Bolsonaro mob unleashed mayhem that shocked the country and was broadcast around the world. Rioters invaded and ransacked Brazil’s Congress, Supreme Court and presidential offices, intending, many of them said, to spur military leaders to topple Mr. Lula, who had taken office just a week earlier.The chaotic attack bore an unsettling resemblance to the Jan. 6, 2021 storming of the U.S. Capitol: Hundreds of right-wing protesters, claiming an election was rigged, stomping through the halls of power.Each episode rattled one of the world’s largest democracies, and almost two years to the day after the U.S. attack, last Sunday’s assault showed that far-right extremism, inspired by antidemocratic leaders and fed by conspiracy theories, remains a grave threat.Mr. Lula and judicial authorities have moved swiftly to reassert control, arresting more than 1,150 rioters, clearing the encampments that gave them refuge and searching for their funders and organizers.But questions continue to swirl about how a relatively small band of unarmed protesters, who had largely publicized their plans, were able so easily to storm the country’s most important government buildings.The New York Times spoke with law enforcement, government officials, eyewitnesses and protesters, and reviewed dozens of videos and hundreds of social media posts to piece together what happened. The reporting shows that a mob, led by what appeared to be a relatively small group of extremists bent on destruction, swiftly and effortlessly overwhelmed a drastically outnumbered police presence.It also shows that some officers not only failed to take any action against rioters, but, in at least one case, waved a spectator toward Congress.The imbalance between protesters and the police remains a central focus of the authorities’ investigation, and interviews with security officials yielded accusations of gross negligence and even active complicity in the mayhem. After the riot, federal authorities suspended the governor responsible for protecting the buildings and ordered the arrest of two top security officials who worked for him. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Brazil’s Protests Resemble the US Capitol Attack on Jan. 6

      by

      Supporters of U.S. President Donald J. Trump gathered outside the Capitol in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.Leah Millis/ReutersSupporters of Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro outside Brazil’s National Congress in Brasília on January 8, 2023.Adriano Machado/ReutersA defeated president claims, falsely, that an election was rigged. After months of baseless claims of fraud, an angry mob of his supporters storms Congress. They overwhelm police and vandalize the seat of national government, threatening the country’s democratic institutions.Similarities between Sunday’s mob violence in Brazil and the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, are self-evident: Jair Bolsonaro, the right-wing former president of Brazil, had for months sought to undermine the results of an election that he lost, in much the same manner that Donald J. Trump did after his defeat in the 2020 presidential election. Trump allies who had helped spread falsehoods about the 2020 election have turned to sowing doubt in the results of Brazil’s presidential election in October.Those efforts by Mr. Bolsonaro and his allies have now culminated in an attempt — however implausible — to overturn the results of Brazil’s election and restore the former president to power. In much the same manner as Jan. 6, the mob that descended on the Brazilian capital overpowered police at the perimeter of the building that houses Congress and swept into the halls of power — breaking windows, taking valuable items and posing for photos in abandoned legislative chambers.A Trump supporter inside the office of Nancy Pelosi, then speaker of the House, on Jan. 6, 2021.Saul Loeb/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesSupporters of Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro rifle through papers on a desk in the Planalto Palace in Brasília on Sunday.Eraldo Peres/Associated PressThe two attacks do not align completely. The Jan. 6 mob was trying to stop the official certification of the results of the 2020 election, a final, ceremonial step taken before the new president, Joseph R. Biden Jr., was inaugurated on Jan. 20.But Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the new president of Brazil, was sworn into office more than a week ago. The results of the presidential election have been certified by the country’s electoral court, not its legislature. There was no official proceeding to disrupt on Sunday, and the Brazilian Congress was not in session.The mob violence on Jan. 6, 2021, “went right to the heart of the changing government,” and the attack in Brazil is not “as heavily weighted with that kind of symbolism,” said Carl Tobias, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Richmond.Pro-Trump protesters storming the Capitol in 2021.Will Oliver/EPA, via ShutterstockPro-Bolsonaro protesters storming the Planalto Presidential Palace in Brasília in 2023.Sergio Lima/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesAnd Mr. Bolsonaro, who has had strong ties with Mr. Trump throughout their years in office, was nowhere near the capital, having taken up residence in Orlando, Fla., about 150 miles from Mr. Trump’s estate at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach.Nevertheless, the riot in Brasília drew widespread condemnation, including from U.S. lawmakers, with many Democrats drawing comparisons between it and the storming of the U.S. Capitol.“Democracies of the world must act fast to make clear there will be no support for right-wing insurrectionists storming the Brazilian Congress,” Representative Jamie Raskin wrote on Twitter. “These fascists modeling themselves after Trump’s Jan. 6 rioters must end up in the same place: prison.”The Capitol Rotunda after a pro-Trump mob stormed the building on Jan. 6.Win Mcnamee/Getty ImagesThe National Congress building in Brasília after pro-Bolsonaro protesters stormed the building on Sunday.Eraldo Peres/Associated PressRepresentative George Santos, a Republican from New York under criminal investigation by Brazilian authorities, appeared to be one of the first elected officials from his party to condemn the mob violence in a post on Twitter on Sunday, but he did not draw a connection to Jan. 6.Many of the lawmakers who condemned the violence had lived through the attack on the Capitol that occurred just over two years ago. Mr. Raskin was the lead impeachment manager in Mr. Trump’s second impeachment trial over his role in inciting the mob.In a final echo of the Jan. 6 attack on Sunday, hours after the riot in Brazil began, Mr. Bolsonaro posted a message on social media calling for peace, much the way Mr. Trump did. Authorities had already announced they had the situation under control. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      What Will Last Year’s Wins Mean for Democracy

      by

      Last year’s democratic wins could have big implications.Imagine if the U.S. and its allies had reacted less aggressively to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Without Western weapons to bolster its defenses, Ukraine could have fallen. Without Western sanctions, Russia might have felt little economic pressure. Such inaction would have sent a message: Western powers won’t stand up for other democracies.At one point, that scenario seemed plausible. After all, it’s what happened when Russia illegally annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and after Russia invaded Georgia in 2008.Why am I writing about this now? Because the West’s enduring rally around Ukraine exemplifies an important trend from 2022 that could influence future global events: “This was the year liberal democracy fought back,” as Janan Ganesh wrote in The Financial Times.For years, democracies have become less representative. Some have fallen into authoritarian rule. Freedom House, which tracks the health of the world’s democracies, has called the decline a “long democratic recession.” But in 2022, small-d democrats fought back not just in Ukraine but also in Brazil, the U.S. and even authoritarian countries like Iran and China.It’s far too early to declare 2022 a turning point. Yet democracy experts, who are often a pessimistic group, are feeling more optimistic. “I tend to be the skunk at the garden party,” said Michael Abramowitz, president of Freedom House. “But I do think the story of the last year has been, if hopeful isn’t the right word, at least more mixed.”Today’s newsletter will look at how 2022 gave democracy a boost and the potential ramifications for the world.Fighting backIn several countries, people stood up against antidemocratic forces that had grown for years.In Brazil, former President Jair Bolsonaro, elected in 2018, initially suggested that he would reject the results if he lost re-election. But after he was defeated, Bolsonaro accepted a peaceful transition to the presidency of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who was sworn in on Sunday. Bolsonaro also criticized what he called an attempted “terrorist act” after police stopped one of his supporters from setting off a bomb in Brasília.In Iran, protests have continued for months against the country’s authoritarian government after a 22-year-old woman died in the custody of the morality police. They are the longest-running anti-government protests since the Islamic revolution of 1979, according to the BBC.In China, resentment over the country’s strict zero-Covid policies spilled over into unusually widespread protests that at times questioned the legitimacy of Xi Jinping’s rule. The Chinese government responded with a crackdown but also eased the Covid policies, partially giving in to the public’s demands.The demonstrations also revealed something bigger: Chinese propaganda has long argued that the country’s one-party model is more effective and efficient than the competitive systems of Western democracies. But China’s handling of Covid and the resulting economic downturn and public outcry show how the government blunders and causes big crises.The U.S. avoided some potential threats to democracy, too. Election deniers who lost midterm races accepted the results. Donald Trump, who continues to falsely question the outcome of the 2020 election, also saw his political prospects damaged after many of his endorsed candidates lost in the midterms.Looking aheadOne good year does not mean that the global democratic recession is over, experts cautioned.With support for Ukraine, “we are now seeing a fatigue,” said Jennifer McCoy, a political scientist at Georgia State University. Westerners could pull back support if it means dealing with higher energy prices for much longer, she added. “It is a question: How long will populations continue to sacrifice for this cause?”There are still other points of concern. India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, has overseen a deterioration in civil liberties, and the country’s independent news media has slowly collapsed. Indonesia passed a law last month restricting free speech. Israel’s new government could threaten judicial independence. In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban won re-election after manipulating the rules in his favor. Coup attempts in Peru and Guinea-Bissau also exposed the fragility of democratic rule.But given the past few years of bad news, even a mixed year can be a welcome reprieve. “It was a much better year than it could have been — but from a very low bar,” said Rachel Kleinfeld, a senior fellow at Carnegie’s Democracy, Conflict and Governance Program.It’s hard to say where any of this will go. But 2022 showed that democrats can fight back.Related: A slice of the U.S. electorate broke with its own voting history to reject extremist Republican candidates — at least partly out of concern for the political system.THE LATEST NEWSCongressRepresentative Kevin McCarthy, left.Haiyun Jiang/The New York TimesRepresentative Kevin McCarthy of California, the Republican leader, is struggling to lock down the votes he needs to become House speaker today.Who could succeed if McCarthy fails? These are the Republicans to watch.Nancy Pelosi, the outgoing speaker, leaves a legacy that will be difficult to match.Brazilian authorities say they will revive a 2008 fraud case against Representative-elect George Santos.N.F.L. Damar Hamlin suffered cardiac arrest after being hit during a game last night.Joshua A. Bickel/Associated PressDamar Hamlin, a 24-year-old safety for the Buffalo Bills, is in critical condition after suffering cardiac arrest during a Monday-night game, the team said.Medical personnel revived Hamlin’s heartbeat, the Bills said.The game — against the Cincinnati Bengals — was postponed. Read the latest on The Athletic.Other Big StoriesUkrainian soldiers fire a mortar round toward in the Donetsk region.Nicole Tung for The New York TimesA Ukrainian attack killed dozens of Russian soldiers in the occupied Donetsk region, Moscow said, in one of the war’s deadliest single strikes against Russia.Trump saw the push to overturn the 2020 election as a financial opportunity and tried to trademark the phrase “Rigged Election,” according to the Jan. 6 committee’s final documents.A storm could bring ice storms, snow and tornadoes to the Midwest and the South.The actor Jeremy Renner had surgery and is in critical condition after a snow plowing accident, his representative said.The number of new U.S. citizens hit its highest annual mark in 15 years.OpinionsAmericans’ confidence in Congress will diminish if the House fails to elect a speaker on the first ballot, Brendan Buck writes.An unfairly arduous college admissions process means that many teenagers with mental health conditions end up at lower-quality schools, Emi Nietfeld says.MORNING READSJuan TamarizIbai Acevedo for The New York TimesMaestro: He made Spain the magic capital of the world.Astronomy: Expect solar eclipses this year. (Sync your calendar to never miss one.)Relationship quiz: How strong are your bonds?Alt-country music: Margo Price has a contrarian streak.Cloud storage: Keep a copy of your memories.Advice from Wirecutter: Browse the most popular kitchen tools.Lives Lived: Jeremiah Green was one of the founding members of Modest Mouse, an indie rock band known for its textured and wide-ranging sound. Green died at 45.SPORTS NEWS FROM THE ATHLETICThe 70-point club: The Cavaliers star Donovan Mitchell became the sixth N.B.A. player to score 70 or more points in a contest with his 71-point, 11-assist outing against the Bulls. Cotton Bowl: Tulane pulled off a last-minute comeback win over U.S.C. and sealed the best season-to-season turnaround in F.B.S. history. ARTS AND IDEAS Jon Bois said he was “making sports documentaries for people who don’t watch sports.”Lila Barth for The New York TimesStatistics as riveting cinemaThe writer-director Jon Bois makes documentaries about seemingly unremarkable sports teams, but his films stand out. They’re full of graphs, charts and diagrams, bordering on scientific, Calum Marsh writes in The Times. Bois hopes to appeal to viewers who don’t watch a lot of sports.“I was one of the weird kids who actually liked high-school algebra,” Bois told The Times. “The ability to condense sports into a bar graph or a pie chart or a scatter plot — in a way, you can watch a thousand games in 10 seconds. It’s like a little time warp.”PLAY, WATCH, EATWhat to CookJulia Gartland for The New York TimesA giant crisp and buttery almond croissant is easy to pull off.What to WatchWes Bentley deploys his knowledge of life’s difficulty in his role in “Yellowstone.”Where to GoIsland hopping in the Grenadines.Now Time to PlayThe pangrams from yesterday’s Spelling Bee were ineffective and infective. Here is today’s puzzle.Here’s today’s Mini Crossword, and a clue: Per person (four letters).And here’s today’s Wordle. Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — GermanP.S. Alaska became a state on this day in 1959.Here’s today’s front page. “The Daily” is about McCarthy’s bid for speaker.Lauren Hard, Lauren Jackson and Claire Moses contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Lula asume la presidencia de Brasil, con Bolsonaro en Florida

      by

      Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva tomó posesión como el nuevo presidente de Brasil. Mientras tanto, el expresidente Jair Bolsonaro, quien enfrenta investigaciones, se refugia en Orlando.El presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva tomó las riendas del gobierno brasileño el domingo en una elaborada toma de posesión, que contó con una caravana de automóviles, un festival de música y cientos de miles de seguidores que llenaron la explanada central de Brasilia, la capital del país.Pero faltaba una persona clave: Jair Bolsonaro, el presidente saliente de extrema derecha.Se suponía que Bolsonaro iba a entregar a Lula la banda presidencial el domingo, un símbolo importante de la transición pacífica del poder en un país donde mucha gente aún recuerda los 21 años de una dictadura militar que terminó en 1985.En cambio, Bolsonaro se despertó el domingo a miles de kilómetros de distancia, en una casa alquilada propiedad de un luchador profesional de artes marciales mixtas a unos cuantos kilómetros de Disney World. Enfrentado a varias investigaciones por su gestión, Bolsonaro voló a Orlando el viernes por la noche y planea permanecer en Florida durante al menos un mes.Bolsonaro cuestionó durante meses la confiabilidad de los sistemas electorales de Brasil, sin pruebas, y cuando perdió en octubre, se negó a reconocerlo inequívocamente. En una especie de discurso de despedida el viernes, rompiendo semanas de un silencio casi absoluto, dijo que trató de impedir que Lula asumiera el cargo, pero fracasó.“Dentro de las leyes, respetando la Constitución, busqué una salida”, dijo. Luego pareció animar a sus partidarios a seguir adelante. “Vivimos en una democracia o no vivimos”, dijo. “Nadie quiere una aventura”.Una multitud de simpatizantes saluda a la comitiva del presidente de Brasil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, y su esposa, Rosângela da Silva, tras su toma de posesión en Brasilia el domingo.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesEl domingo, Lula subió la rampa de acceso a las oficinas presidenciales con un grupo diverso de brasileños, entre ellos una mujer negra, un hombre discapacitado, un niño de 10 años, un hombre indígena y un trabajador de una fábrica. Una voz anunció entonces que Lula aceptaría la banda verde y amarilla del “pueblo brasileño”, y Aline Sousa, una recolectora de basura de 33 años, tomó el papel de Bolsonaro y colocó la banda al nuevo presidente.En un discurso ante el Congreso el domingo, Lula dijo que combatiría el hambre y la deforestación, levantaría la economía e intentaría unir al país. Pero también apuntó contra su predecesor, diciendo que Bolsonaro había amenazado la democracia de Brasil.“Bajo los vientos de la redemocratización, solíamos decir: ‘Dictadura nunca más’”, dijo. “Hoy, después del terrible desafío que hemos superado, debemos decir: ‘Democracia para siempre’”.El ascenso de Lula a la presidencia culmina una asombrosa remontada política. En su día fue el presidente más popular de Brasil, y dejó el cargo con un índice de aprobación superior al 80 por ciento. Luego cumplió 580 días en prisión, de 2018 a 2019, por cargos de corrupción relacionados con aceptar un departamento y renovaciones de empresas de construcción que licitaban contratos gubernamentales.Después de que esas condenas fueran anuladas porque el Supremo Tribunal Federal de Brasil dictaminó que el juez del caso de Lula había sido parcial, se postuló de nuevo para la presidencia, y ganó.Lula, de 77 años, y sus partidarios sostienen que fue víctima de una persecución política. Bolsonaro y sus partidarios dicen que Brasil tiene ahora un criminal como presidente.Cientos de miles de personas acudieron a Brasilia —la capital extensa y planificada que fue fundada en 1960 para albergar al gobierno brasileño—, muchos de ellos vestidos con el rojo vivo del izquierdista Partido de los Trabajadores de Lula.Simpatizantes del Presidente Lula vitorean durante su toma de posesión.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesDurante el fin de semana, los pasajeros de los aviones cantaron canciones sobre Lula, los juerguistas bailaron samba en las fiestas de Año Nuevo y, por toda la ciudad, se oyeron gritos espontáneos desde balcones y esquinas, anunciando la llegada de Lula y la salida de Bolsonaro.“La toma de posesión de Lula tiene que ver sobre todo con la esperanza”, dijo Isabela Nascimento, de 30 años, una desarrolladora de software que acudió a las festividades el domingo. “Espero verlo representando no solo a un partido político, sino a toda una población: todo un grupo de personas que solo quieren ser más felices”.Sin embargo, en otras partes de la ciudad, miles de partidarios de Bolsonaro permanecieron acampados frente a la sede del ejército, como lo han estado desde las elecciones, muchos diciendo que estaban convencidos de que los militares evitarían que Lula asumiera el cargo el domingo.“El ejército tiene patriotismo y amor por el país y, en el pasado, el ejército hizo lo mismo”, dijo el sábado Magno Rodrigues, de 60 años, un mecánico y conserje retirado que da discursos diarios en las protestas, refiriéndose al golpe militar de 1964 que dio paso a la dictadura.Magno Rodrigues, de 60 años, mecánico y conserje retirado, ha pasado las últimas nueve semanas acampado frente al cuartel general del ejército brasileño, durmiendo en una tienda de campaña sobre una estrecha colchoneta con su esposa.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesRodrigues ha pasado las últimas nueve semanas durmiendo con su esposa en una tienda de campaña en un colchón pequeño. Ofreció un recorrido por el campamento, convertido en una pequeña aldea desde que Bolsonaro perdió las elecciones. Cuenta con duchas, servicio de lavandería, estaciones de recarga de teléfonos celulares, un hospital y 28 puestos de comida.En gran medida, las protestas no han sido violentas —con más rezos que disturbios—, pero un pequeño grupo de personas ha incendiado vehículos. El gobierno de transición de Lula había dado a entender que los campamentos no se tolerarían durante mucho más tiempo.¿Cuánto tiempo estaba Rodrigues dispuesto a quedarse? “El tiempo que haga falta para liberar a mi país”, dijo. “El resto de mi vida si es necesario”.La ausencia de Bolsonaro y la presencia de miles de manifestantes que creen que la elección fue robada ilustran la profunda división y los enormes desafíos que enfrenta Lula en su tercer mandato como presidente del país más grande de América Latina y una de las mayores democracias del mundo.Lula presidió el auge económico de Brasil entre 2003 y 2011, pero el país no estaba tan polarizado entonces y los vientos económicos eran mucho más promisorios. La elección de Lula culmina una ola izquierdista en América Latina, en la que desde 2018 seis de los siete países más grandes de la región eligieron a líderes de izquierda, impulsados por una reacción contra los mandatarios en el poder.Una gran multitud se reunió para la toma de posesión el domingo en la capital de Brasil.Silvia Izquierdo/Associated PressLa decisión de Bolsonaro de pasar al menos las primeras semanas de la presidencia de Lula en Florida muestra su inquietud sobre su futuro en Brasil. Bolsonaro, de 67 años, está vinculado a cinco investigaciones separadas, entre ellas, una sobre la divulgación de documentos relacionados con una investigación clasificada, otra sobre sus ataques a las máquinas de votación de Brasil y otra sobre sus posibles conexiones con “milicias digitales” que difunden desinformación en su nombre.Como ciudadano común, Bolsonaro perderá ahora la inmunidad procesal que tenía como presidente. Algunos casos en su contra probablemente serán trasladados del Supremo Tribunal Federal a las cortes locales.Algunos de los principales fiscales federales que han trabajado en los casos creen que hay pruebas suficientes para condenar a Bolsonaro, particularmente en el caso relacionado con la divulgación de material clasificado, según un alto fiscal federal que habló bajo condición de anonimato para discutir investigaciones confidenciales.El domingo, Lula dijo al Congreso que Bolsonaro podría enfrentar consecuencias. “No tenemos ningún ánimo de revancha contra quienes intentaron someter a la nación a sus planes personales e ideológicos, pero garantizaremos el imperio de la ley”, dijo. “Quien erró responderá por sus errores”.Es poco probable que la presencia de Bolsonaro en Estados Unidos pueda protegerlo de ser procesado en Brasil. Aun así, Florida se ha convertido en una especie de refugio para los brasileños conservadores en los últimos años.Comentaristas prominentes de algunos de los programas de entrevistas más populares de Brasil tienen su sede en Florida. Un provocador de extrema derecha que se enfrenta a la detención en Brasil por amenazar a jueces ha vivido en Florida mientras espera una respuesta a su solicitud de asilo político en Estados Unidos. Y Carla Zambelli, una de las principales aliadas de Bolsonaro en el Congreso de Brasil, huyó a Florida durante casi tres semanas después de que fuera filmada persiguiendo a un hombre a punta de pistola en la víspera de las elecciones.El expresidente Jair Bolsonaro, tercero desde la derecha, llegando a votar en Río de Janeiro en octubre. El viernes partió hacia Estados Unidos.Maria Magdalena Arrellaga para The New York TimesBolsonaro planea permanecer en Florida de uno a tres meses, lo que le da cierta distancia para observar si el gobierno de Lula impulsará alguna de las investigaciones en su contra, según un amigo cercano de la familia Bolsonaro que habló bajo condición de anonimato para discutir planes privados. El gobierno brasileño también autorizó a cuatro ayudantes a pasar un mes en Florida con Bolsonaro, según un aviso oficial.El sábado, Bolsonaro saludó a sus nuevos vecinos en la entrada de su casa alquilada en Orlando, muchos de ellos inmigrantes brasileños que se tomaron selfis con el presidente saliente. Luego fue a comer a un KFC.No es infrecuente que ex jefes de Estado vivan en Estados Unidos para ocupar cargos académicos o similares. Pero no es habitual que un jefe de Estado busque refugio en Estados Unidos ante un posible enjuiciamiento en su país, especialmente cuando el país de origen es un aliado democrático de Estados Unidos.Bolsonaro y sus aliados argumentan que es un objetivo político de la izquierda brasileña y, en particular, del Supremo Tribunal Federal de Brasil. Han abandonado en gran medida las afirmaciones de que las elecciones fueron amañadas debido al fraude electoral, pero en su lugar ahora afirman que fueron injustas porque Alexandre de Moraes, un juez del Supremo Tribunal que encabeza el organismo electoral de Brasil, inclinó la balanza a favor de Lula.Un campamento de partidarios de Bolsonaro se ha convertido en una pequeña ciudad frente al cuartel general del ejército en Brasilia.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesDe Moraes fue un actor activo en las elecciones, al suspender las cuentas de redes sociales de muchos de los partidarios de Bolsonaro y conceder a Lula más tiempo en televisión debido a declaraciones engañosas en los anuncios políticos de Bolsonaro. De Moraes ha dicho que necesitaba actuar para contrarrestar las posturas antidemocráticas de Bolsonaro y sus partidarios. A algunos juristas les preocupa que haya abusado de su poder, al actuar a menudo de forma unilateral en formas que van mucho más allá de las de un típico juez del Supremo Tribunal.Aun así, Bolsonaro se ha enfrentado a críticas generalizadas, tanto en la derecha como en la izquierda, por su respuesta a su derrota electoral. Después de insinuar durante meses que rebatiría cualquier derrota, encendiendo a sus partidarios y preocupando a sus críticos, se mantuvo en silencio y se negó a reconocer públicamente la victoria de Lula. Su gobierno llevó a cabo la transición mientras él se alejaba de los focos y de muchas de sus funciones oficiales.El sábado por la noche, en su discurso de despedida a la nación, incluso su vicepresidente, Hamilton Mourão, un general retirado, dejó clara su opinión sobre los últimos momentos de Bolsonaro como presidente.“Líderes que deberían tranquilizar y unir a la nación en torno a un proyecto de país han dejado que su silencio o su protagonismo inoportuno y dañino creen un clima de caos y desintegración social”, dijo Mourão.Jack Nicas es el jefe de la corresponsalía del Times en Brasil, que abarca Brasil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay y Uruguay. Antes cubría tecnología desde San Francisco. Antes de unirse al Times, en 2018, trabajó durante siete años en The Wall Street Journal. @jacknicas • Facebook More