I think global media coverage Trump/Bolsonaro will most likely equal Obama/Rousseff or any other presidential couple across the Americas.

So the question boils down to this one: why the heck do these crazy right wing populists get their support in the electorate in countries as diverse as USA, Brazil, India, France, Austria, Hungary, the Philippines and many more? How are global causes and local specificies interlinked?

Well Brazil is 8th largest nation by GDP in the world and headed to be No.4 by 2030.

Yes US disfunctionality impacts on the world....eg attempts to deal with global warming

But is it not also that Brazil is in the south and therefore 'out of sight our of mind'?

Peter yes the link between global causes and local specificities needs urgent study. For what it's worth I do not think it is useful to think of Bolsonaro in terms of Trump. there is a very Brazilian logis to his rise

Philadelphia, PA

Dear Munck & readers,

I think you may need to tell us more about the specifics of developments in Brazil. What I am aware of is that a prior elected government became caught up in corruption scandals and was effectively thrown out --with a great deal of public commotion. (The sitting President was impeached and removed from office.) It was very much a pro-globalization government, as I recall, and very much in step with the globalizing international political "in-crowd" of the times.

Isn't it a matter of the local globalizing elites being thrown out? Isn't that the basis of the comparison to political developments elsewhere?

H.G. Callaway

Yes, I think that HG Callaway stole my supposed thunder. That's it, in a nutshell. And it's not all bad. People are revolting against the notion of a "political elite" that claims they have all the answers. People are questioning why they should just accept the politicians' "greater wisdom." Perhaps people are becoming more informed, which can only make them more cynical.

It's not all bad. I think this basic topic has been discussed in different threads, here on RG. "The decline of liberal democracy," or similar. Of course, like any other revolt, this can go too far the other way. But to me, if people use their own heads, instead of allowing themselves to be led around like sheep, it can't be all bad. Within obvious bounds.

I heard a really good point last night, made by a New York Times reporter. She said that the right is finding it okay to openly judge and insult people, while at the same time, the left has limited itself to only allow a tiny number of topics to be discussed at all. And she listed two or three that were permitted, by the left (if I recall, gender neutrality, gay rights, not much more). I realize this applies to the US primarily, but I can see it also occurring in Western Europe.

Not too surprising if people finally rebel.

I follow answers

best regards

I follow answers

best regards

Albert:

Just briefly, I wonder how the NYT reporter comes to the conclusion that the left was only discussing a very limited range of issues. In my perception and practice, the opposite is the case, starting with social justice and the whole army of scholars discussing its root causes, going further to health care, educational reform, local and regional development, environmental issues, international affairs, more sustainable forms of economy, labour issues and contemporary conditions of work, and this is just the beginning of the list. By contrast, I observe some people on the right who try to reduce the discussion to alleged problems related to migration.

Dear colleagues,

Since the sitting President (Dilma Rousseff) was impeached and removed from office, the Bolsonaro, has been working on conservative values (false moralism), fear of crime, anger about corruption (although Bolsonaro and its collaborators are involved in corruption schemes), and rampant fake news to gain support from across the political spectrum.

In my humble opinion, the people are not becoming more informed, just exposing their prejudgement. On the other hand, there was an direct impact of the some evangelical churches (also, involved in corruption schemes) in the Brazilian elections results.

Because the financial elites, transnational companies and the governments of the global North expect Bolsonaro to act in their best interest. Therefore they do not bother he is a fascist. On the contrary, they welcome his openly or in a hidden way his electoral victory. Market analysts and banks from the global North were pretty enthusiastic about his electoral victory. The German liberal party's foundation supported and trained members of Bolsonaro's party. The media, the US and the EU prefer to continue picking on Venezuela and be quiet regarding Brazil (not to speak of other countries). The global North has always preferred fascist regimes, authoritarian leaders and dictatorships acting in their interest to democracy and the still. Just take a look at Honduras, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Philippines etc. As US president Nixon put it once regarding dictator Somoza in Nicaragua "We know he is a son of a bitch, but he is our son of a bitch" (sorry to all the honorable sex workers, doing a much more respectable job than Nixon did and most politicians and CEO's do).

Easy answer: whatever happens in the US, affects the US-market, US-economy, US-labor market, in- and export and so forth, does affect international markets and international security. If Bolsonaro decides to tax automobile or steel-imports 25% it does affect global economy less than if Mr. Trump does the same thing. If Wall Street sneezes, DAX, Nikkei and all the others get the flue. Brazil IBOVESTA does not quite have that effect.

It seems quite natural for people to pay attention to people and events that affect their own life and well being more than other people and events that affect them less. If my cab-driver seems utterly drunk when I am about to enter a taxi it will concern me more than the state of somebody else's cabby, even if that one is even more wasted.

Coming from Kenya the Brazilian reaction compared to that of USA is simply a reflection of our very different political and economic development. The USA has a long tradition of ethical and accepted political behavior, so the Trump's departure from these is alarming to Americans and the West with excess communication from different media. Brazil or Kenya have no long tradition of to look back on. Looking back in Brazil ,in the recent past we see unconstitutional government and authoritarian management of the state. The people of Brazil's' key concerns are a reliable economy,government services and security ...and the order that ensure these thing work are more important then the high ideals of caring about dangerous populist. Traver Noah of late night TV captures this in saying "Americans are concerned about Trump because this is the first African president of the US!" In Kenya or Brazil a Trump like president is not far removed to get extra attention!

Hi Everyone.

Im coming from South America, and i can affirm that Bolsonaro, is a kind of politician at some point needed in that continent in order no only to tackle insecurities issues but also corruption. Those who compare Bolsonaro with Trump is because they have a very little notion about geo politics whatsoever.

Well populist politics is not new as it has been applied differetly by states over the decades ranging from anticolonial experiences to electoral gains. Now a days, since world has undergone sognificant changes in the post cold war era and thevtradyional hegemonies are on the wane with emergence of new actors the efforts at survival and maintaining tradtional dominance has helped populism grow manifold. This togetherwith the huge electoral gains it ensures by subduing the diversity and guaranteeing political mileage to the goverining elites make its presence urgent. US has a long liberal tradition and Trump,s backtracking from it gave him momentary electoral gain but he represents the voices which are anti immigrant and pro American that makes him popular too which cant be compared with Brazil.