An idea out of place – 03/05/2023 – Maria Hermínia Tavares

There is an important debate going on in the European and North American lefts about changes in the composition of the electorate and in the agendas of the progressive parties.

The French economist Thomas Piketty, for example, has been insisting on the thesis that, if, in the past, the foundations of the left in Western Europe were citizens with low income and low education, today it is the most educated who support it; the poor, on the other hand, migrated to the radical right.

For this reason, a left emerged which it called “Brahman”, alluding to the upper caste of scholars in traditional India.

The mutation of the social foundations of progressive associations took place step by step, with increasing importance attributed by them to themes dear to the educated elites — defense of the environment, gender equality, respect for different expressions of sexuality and the rights of ethnic minorities. This would have reinforced the adherence of the poorest and least educated to conservative movements.

With less empirical grounds, but more forcefully, the American political scientist Mark Lilla blamed the identity policies adopted by the Democratic Party, of which he is a sympathizer, for the crumbling of social cohesion, thus paving the way for the rise of Donald Trump.

It is questionable whether the same phenomenon is repeated in Brazil. There are those who answer yes and argue that part of the Brazilian left is leaving aside the fight against poverty and misery; therefore, by privileging identity struggles, it would make life easier for the moralist conservatism mobilized by the national extreme right.

There are good reasons to think that this is a misplaced idea.

Here, the similar social forces that broke up in the rich West continue to coexist under the same roof on the left.

On the one hand, the electoral data are clear: Lula’s votes came in large numbers from the poorest and least educated. On the other hand, leftist parties incorporated —with varying degrees of conviction— the banners of environmental protection, anti-racism, recognition of gender rights and the demands of indigenous and traditional peoples.

Yes: the challenge of harmonizing the socioeconomic agenda of reducing poverty and income inequality with advanced policies for the protection of environmental heritage, racial equality and rights linked to gender, ethnicity and cultural diversity is real.

There are different values ​​to harmonize, prejudices to overcome, ways of saying that don’t offend. But being on the same political turf can create a different path than brahmins in the rich North.

PRESENT LINK: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release five free hits of any link per day. Just click the blue F below.