Emir Sader
Latin America would not be a victim of the strong right-wing offensive if it did not count on the weaknesses of the Latin American left. A common element in the right wing’s recovery of strength has been, for example, the rescue by the right-wing of social support bases that progressive governments had achieved. Governments that have been elected or re-elected with high levels of electoral support have been defeated or cornered by barely any majority support. It is not so much a question of the loss of support of middle sectors of the population – although this has also occurred in these – but, above all, of the loss of popular sectors, direct beneficiaries of the governments’ social policies, which have been rescued by right-wing forces, based on strong media campaigns, but also on mechanisms of persecution and political criminalization of the leaderships of the left.
As a result, in spite of having a government program with the potential for broad popular support, governments have been defeated or have triumphed by narrow margins of votes, in the face of a right-wing that cannot confront that program because it does not have any social policy proposals. That is why the right-wing has to shift the countries’ central agenda towards issues such as corruption, public security or conservative moral issues.
The Latin American left had been hegemonic in the countries where it has managed to elect and re-elect its governments, all of which are anti-neoliberal in essence. Here I will dwell on one aspect of the weaknesses that have led to the setbacks of those governments: the inability of Latin American critical thinking to be contemporary with those advances, to have understood their nature, their strength and their weaknesses, and to have contributed to the analysis of those processes, supporting them and promoting the overcoming of their problems.
In the first decade, sectors of critical thinking became involved in the newly emerging governments. Not all sectors of social thought were involved, some critical of some aspects of those governments, some absolutely disconnected from the progressive character of the governments, often joining the right-wing in opposition.
When progressive governments have started to face more difficulties, with the recovery of the right-wing initiative, the inability to formulate the theoretical formulation of the crisis that was coming has made it even more difficult for the progressive camp to react. They could not count on extensive debates that pointed to the weaknesses that facilitated the recovery of the right-wing initiative, the loss of the dispute over central theoretical and political issues, such as democracy, the role of the state, among others. There had been a withdrawal of a large part of the intelligentsia toward the universities, closed in on themselves in their priority themes of analysis, as well as processes of bureaucratization that have affected entities that should represent and mobilize critical thought.
Today, the capacity to understand the current problems of Latin America is concentrated around the main leaders of the left on the continent, because theoretical approaches cannot be separated from concrete political solutions. But also because these require a deeper and more far-reaching understanding of the crisis that the continent is experiencing and its prospects for positive improvement.
Without the active and creative participation of Latin American critical thinking, we will not be able to emerge from this crisis with sufficient strength to promote a new progressive cycle in our countries. Likewise, without a concrete political solution, critical thinking will be exhausted and will not have any re-articulation with the existing political practice.
America Latina en Movimiento
Translation by Resumen Latinoamericano, North America Bureau
