Ooooooo.....Brazil seems to be in a different....but familiar path.....
Hmmm...no idea what to comment actually....
BTW, yeah Carey presidency could be in tatters if the relationship problem is as IOTL....
Ooooooo.....Brazil seems to be in a different....but familiar path.....Exit the ARENA
Like many Latin American countries in the 1960s and early 1970s, Brazil had been no stranger to a populist, ostensibly left-wing government coming to power and then being ousted in a coup by a conservative military, a common story whose Lusophone chapter was written in 1964 when Joao Goulart was overthrown in a putsch organized in part with quiet American acquiescence. The Brazilian military junta had operated somewhat differently from many of its peers, however, in forming its "National Renewal Alliance," or ARENA, as a governing body, legalizing a mainstream (albeit conservative) opposition, and by the standards of thugs like Pinochet, Videla and Stroessner it was fairly moderate, even as ARENA exiled and arbitrarily tortured dissidents and killed somewhere in the vicinity of four hundred opposition members extrajudicially. Part of the reason it was able to operate this way was the remarkable "Brazilian Miracle" of the 1970s in which Brazil enjoyed Latin America's highest growth rates and strongest economy, and despite strict censorship and coziness of media outfits such as TV Globo with the state, a thriving civil society based in the expanding middle class emerged by the late 1970s to allow the outwardly moderate Joao Figuerido to become President of Brazil in 1979 and continue the slow re-democratization process begun under his immediate predecessor and mentor Ernesto Geisel over the previous six years, including a moderate response to massive labor strikes.
The oil shocks of 1978 and 1979 badly damaged Brazil's economy, however, much more so than the 1973 oil crisis that had shaken confidence in Latin America. The Decada Perdida may not have been as severe or long-lasting in Brazil, but it struck nonetheless, and even as Figuerido attempted to transition the country gradually under the new umbrella party "PDS" - Democratic Social Party, effectively a rebranded ARENA - the steady economic growth and rising standards of living on which the Brazilian dictatorship had made the backbone of its credibility with the public ended. By late 1981, Brazil's economy was not just sagging but collapsing, and it was overshadowed only by true basket cases like neighboring Argentina and Chile or Mexico, which had entered sovereign default in the summer of 1980 and seemed to be tripling down on its disastrous economic policies [1]. As of the spring of 1982, Brazil was the world's largest debtor, with soaring inflation that the government was forced to combat with extremely harsh austerity measures that drove many of the millions lifted out of poverty during the Brazilian Miracle back into destitution.
The timing for this economic conflagration was poor, as it coincided nearly exactly with the 1982 Congressional and state elections that the newly-legalized opposition intended to directly contest. While labor strikes were still led by the fiery young leftist Lula da Silva, more institutional opposition had consolidated around the figure of Leonel Brizola, who had returned from exile to take back control of the Labor Party of Brazil, or PTB, [2] and presenting an updated and democratized version of Getulio Vargas' program of trabalhismo, a democratic socialist but non-communist left-wing agenda centered in a Brazilian, Christian and populist context - exactly the kind of thinking popular with devoutly Catholic Brazil, in which Vargas' Estado Novo and its remarkable progress still was hugely popular. The other component of the opposition was the more traditionally liberal "big tent" progressive democratic outfit Brazilian Democratic Movement Party, or PMDB, headed up by Tancredo Neves and Ulysses Guimaraes. These men were more intellectual, lawyerly, establishmentarian figures nonetheless firmly opposed to the furtherance of the PDS-led regime, which was widely expected to transition to civilian rule once Figuerido's term ended in 1985.
The stakes in 1982 were thus very high. It remained to be seen who, exactly, would lead the opposition into this bold new era for Brazil as democratization loomed on the horizon by largely peaceful means (in contrast to Argentina, where civil war between the opposition and junta had been narrowly avoided in 1979). An opposition victory could lead to direct elections for the Presidency, and perhaps a new constitution; an opposition victory was also likely necessary to correct some of the economic malaise that was rapidly compounding. Neves and Guimaraes thus cut a deal that the former would be the formal party leader but the latter would head up the bloc in Congress should it be successful; they were given a huge boost when Brizola announced he would not run candidates in constituencies in which PMDB was likely to carry, in order to prevent splitting the vote.
PDS made a bevy of mistakes as well; first and foremost, they anointed as their standard-bearer the cartoonishly corrupt Paulo Maluf, a Lebanese-Brazilian apparatchik from Sao Paulo who had served as both mayor and governor and ran on a brasher, more populist brand of conservatism meant to appeal to middle class appetites and show what PDS was capable of without being an explicitly military party. Maluf's candidature, despite remarkably favorable media coverage from the military-aligned news stations, became a lightning rod for the opposition.
The elections of 1982 thus ended with the PMDB on 245 seats, enough to form a majority on their own, and PDS under 200; Brizola's PTB took 34 seats in the Congress, thus making it a plainly junior partner to Guimaraes, who was made Speaker, but a partner nonetheless that could lock PDS out. What really effected the vote results, though, were the mass defeats of PDS governors in several states, thus ensuring the opposition a coalition of 13 Senators to the government's 11. Brazilians, by the millions, rejoiced in the streets; the democratic transition had seemingly arrived years earlier than thought possible, and Figuerido pointedly resisted calls to send tanks into the streets to contest the results, in part thanks to crucial pressure and support from Washington for the continued transition.
Democracy, eighteen years later, was returning to Brazil - and the elections of 1985, when Congress would theoretically elect a new President unless the law was changed, loomed large...
[1] More on this later
[2] The butterfly here is he actually gets the old party back rather than seeing Ivete Vargas in charge
Indeed. 97 will be a lot worse than 94, too, for whatever it’s worthRelationship drama aside, what I find interesting is that we see the next big global period of economic instability won't occur until there's a Republican back in the White House. While the Democrats are going to attrition pretty hard in the back half of their 12 years of Presidential control (I think 1982 will go well for them and let Carey finish out his first term strong), they may be back in the majorty before the new millenium. Republican control of Congress, especially the House will probably end at the 6 year itch in 98' for Mr. GOP 1992.
Holy shit hahahaMy father-in-law is Irish Catholic and one of sixteen! My wife has something like sixty five first cousins lol. So yeah, can confirm.
A great TLOoooooo.....Brazil seems to be in a different....but familiar path.....
Hmmm...no idea what to comment actually....
BTW, yeah Carey presidency could be in tatters if the relationship problem is as IOTL....
@KingSweden24 can correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall that the plan was for the GOP to lurch further to the right and return to the White House in 1993.I wonder what the GOP's general path will be after 1988. I guess that there are several key factors of the TL to be decided before we can even talk about how TTL GOP will be compared to the OTL GOP, nevertheless, I do think that a more Tory-like GOP is possible, perhaps they go down a path similar to that of David Cameron's compassionate conservatism?
I tend to see it trending to be tory-like too and taking on a more of a chris christie-like type of conservatism which is similar to Ford’s where instead of saying “We can’t give people too much government because they’ll get fat and lazy, welfare queen blah blah blah” , it will be more like “Look at the deficit democrats are running with their huge spending programs we won’t afford it we need to “tinker” with these programs for our government to last in the long haul”.I do think that a more Tory-like GOP is possible, perhaps they go down a path similar to that of David Cameron's compassionate conservatism?
Well, it has been a while since the last time that I read this TL, so I could be wrong indeed; regardless, I am excited to see what the OP comes up with.@KingSweden24 can correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to recall that the plan was for the GOP to lurch further to the right and return to the White House in 1993.
This is exactly what I was thinking about. Honestly, depending on how the upcoming elections in the TL turnout, I think that there are some possible exciting candidates such as John Heinz, Arlen Specter, Christine Todd-Whitman, John Warner, and Charles Percy. I'll admit that some of them are "too boring," but I'd argue that others could fit the TL pretty well. Although, they at least make for good running-mate options for a moderate, "Nixonian" RepublicanI tend to see it trending to be tory-like too and taking on a more of a chris christie-like type of conservatism which is similar to Ford’s where instead of saying “We can’t give people too much government because they’ll get fat and lazy, welfare queen blah blah blah” , it will be more like “Look at the deficit democrats are running with their huge spending programs we won’t afford it we need to “tinker” with these programs for our government to last in the long haul”.
I wonder what the GOP's general path will be after 1988. I guess that there are several key factors of the TL to be decided before we can even talk about how TTL GOP will be compared to the OTL GOP, nevertheless, I do think that a more Tory-like GOP is possible, perhaps they go down a path similar to that of David Cameron's compassionate conservatism?
I tend to see it trending to be tory-like too and taking on a more of a chris christie-like type of conservatism which is similar to Ford’s where instead of saying “We can’t give people too much government because they’ll get fat and lazy, welfare queen blah blah blah” , it will be more like “Look at the deficit democrats are running with their huge spending programs we won’t afford it we need to “tinker” with these programs for our government to last in the long haul”.
You’re both barking up the right tree generally, though many of these names are way too moderate even for TTL’s GOPThis is exactly what I was thinking about. Honestly, depending on how the upcoming elections in the TL turnout, I think that there are some possible exciting candidates such as John Heinz, Arlen Specter, Christine Todd-Whitman, John Warner, and Charles Percy. I'll admit that some of them are "too boring," but I'd argue that others could fit the TL pretty well. Although, they at least make for good running-mate options for a moderate, "Nixonian" Republican
It’s going to be really bad - 1994 a worthy comparisonEither way the 1990 midterms is going to be an all-time bloodbath for whatever Dems are left in Congress. This timeline's version of OTL 1994 for sure.
A good guess. He was certainly used well in “Exocet” which im hoping comes back from hiatus soonPersonally, I feel that Lamar Alexander is a potential contender to be the GOP President from 1993-2001. His strand of conservatism seems to mesh well with the environment that KingSweden24 has established. A conservative southerner, but not an ideologically zealous one.
That's surprising. I mean, while the hard right of the Republican Party has always been a pretty dominant force there, they are not invincible. Their policies haven't really changed in the last few decades. Over in OTL, it was thanks to Reagan that they even remained relevant. After all, in a 1980s dominated by Democrats (especially those more on the lefty side), the hard right would be left in a lurch.You’re both barking up the right tree generally, though many of these names are way too moderate even for TTL’s GOP
I’m referring more to John Heinz and Christie Whitman specifically. There’s plenty of names right of them but well left of the Gingrich GOP of the 90sThat's surprising. I mean, while the hard right of the Republican Party has always been a pretty dominant force there, they are not invincible. Their policies haven't really changed in the last few decades. Over in OTL, it was thanks to Reagan that they even remained relevant. After all, in a 1980s dominated by Democrats (especially those more on the lefty side), the hard right would be left in a lurch.
Baby boomers would be coming of age in the 1980s and in the same way how Reagan held a prominent influence fo them, Carey ITTL or whoever ran in a Dem 1980s will hold it fo them. The economic prosperity will put them in high regards and any reforms that aid the common folk (especially healthcare), will become more accepted as the norm. Something that the hard right will be unable to deal with. As such, by the early 1990s, what do they have to offer? Being the "other" choice can only get you so far, especially if you do something to PO other folk. Plus, there's the standard with having actual popularity and appeal.
This is an interesting point of view, and in a way, it reminds me of the issues that the Conservative Party had with putting up an appealing face and voice that could counter Blair and New Labour (as for the Cons it was Cameron's compassionate conservatism). Ultimately, I think that if whatever healthcare reform Carey does ends up being as beloved as the NHS is in Britain then it'll become quite a challenge for the more conservative part of the GOP to stand in an election against the healthcare achievements of the Carey admin. Regardless, it'll be fascinating to read what OP comes up with as it pertains to the GOP's ideological shifts and how the American public responds to the Carey Admin's reformsThat's surprising. I mean, while the hard right of the Republican Party has always been a pretty dominant force there, they are not invincible. Their policies haven't really changed in the last few decades. Over in OTL, it was thanks to Reagan that they even remained relevant. After all, in a 1980s dominated by Democrats (especially those more on the lefty side), the hard right would be left in a lurch.
Baby boomers would be coming of age in the 1980s and in the same way how Reagan held a prominent influence fo them, Carey ITTL or whoever ran in a Dem 1980s will hold it fo them. The economic prosperity will put them in high regards and any reforms that aid the common folk (especially healthcare), will become more accepted as the norm. Something that the hard right will be unable to deal with. As such, by the early 1990s, what do they have to offer? Being the "other" choice can only get you so far, especially if you do something to PO other folk. Plus, there's the standard with having actual popularity and appeal.
Understandable there, but am curious very much on which of them will herald in the new GOP era.I’m referring more to John Heinz and Christie Whitman specifically. There’s plenty of names right of them but well left of the Gingrich GOP of the 90s
Healthcare is one of the main things, but it’s more than that. It’s putting the GOP in difficult positions in what they can support and how right-wing they can be without losing mainstream support. The overton window is shifting to the left after all, especially with how the economy will recover and so on under Carey.This is an interesting point of view, and in a way, it reminds me of the issues that the Conservative Party had with putting up an appealing face and voice that could counter Blair and New Labour (as for the Cons it was Cameron's compassionate conservatism). Ultimately, I think that if whatever healthcare reform Carey does ends up being as beloved as the NHS is in Britain then it'll become quite a challenge for the more conservative part of the GOP to stand in an election against the healthcare achievements of the Carey admin. Regardless, it'll be fascinating to read what OP comes up with as it pertains to the GOP's ideological shifts and how the American public responds to the Carey Admin's reforms
I think, as you said, with economic reforms and government provided healthcare being more widely accepted, the GOP's hard right may not have much oxygen in the economic space.That's surprising. I mean, while the hard right of the Republican Party has always been a pretty dominant force there, they are not invincible. Their policies haven't really changed in the last few decades. Over in OTL, it was thanks to Reagan that they even remained relevant. After all, in a 1980s dominated by Democrats (especially those more on the lefty side), the hard right would be left in a lurch.
Baby boomers would be coming of age in the 1980s and in the same way how Reagan held a prominent influence fo them, Carey ITTL or whoever ran in a Dem 1980s will hold it fo them. The economic prosperity will put them in high regards and any reforms that aid the common folk (especially healthcare), will become more accepted as the norm. Something that the hard right will be unable to deal with. As such, by the early 1990s, what do they have to offer? Being the "other" choice can only get you so far, especially if you do something to PO other folk. Plus, there's the standard with having actual popularity and appeal.
I mean, the American hard right already do that and it’s their main thing since both OTL parties are neoliberal economically.I think, as you said, with economic reforms and government provided healthcare being more widely accepted, the GOP's hard right may not have much oxygen in the economic space.
That raises the possibility that the hard right faction may be more "european" like Europe's far right parties, focusing more on social conservatism.