The left turn in Latin America and its consequences for social change : a comparative study of Brazil and Chile

(1)

The Left Turn in Latin America and its

Consequences for Social Change

A Comparative Study of Brazil and Chile

Author: Yrene Coli Rivera Student number: 5897831

Supervisor: Dr Said Rezaeiejan Second Reader: Dr Mehdi Amineh

Master Thesis Political Science, International Relations Research Project: Postcolonialism and Development

(2)

Since the late 1990s onwards, left-of-centre governments have been emerging in most Latin American countries. This shift in politics started with the electoral victory of Hugo Chávez in 1998 in Venezuela. Soon he was followed by Ricardo Lagos in Chile (2000), Luiz Ínacio Lula da Silva in Brazil (2002), Néstor Kirchner in Argentina (2003), Tabaré Vazquez in Uruguay (2004) and Evo Morales in Bolivia (2005). In the 2000s leftist Presidents and Parties were re-elected in Venezuela (2000, 2006), Chile (2006, 2013), Brazil (2006, 2010), Argentina (2007), Ecuador (2009), Bolivia (2009) and Uruguay (2009). The emergence of these left governments in Latin America has been explained as a reaction against the consequences of neoliberal policies, which were introduced region-wide during the 1980s. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, socialist development models implemented in the decades before in several Latin American countries were then replaced by neoliberal economic policies. These reforms deepened Latin America’s integration into the global trade and finance whereby governments’ policy options were being narrowed. Whilst the neoliberal policies controlled inflation, which had previously caused major debt crisis in much of the region, these newly adopted policies also led to little economic growth, periodic financial crisis, as well as deepening of social and economic inequalities. The emergence of left governments are therefore generally seen as opposing to neoliberalism and committed to greater social spending and wealth redistribution.

However, while this is true for some left governments, others have not abandoned neo-liberal policies. Therefore, a division is often made between a ‘radical’ and a ‘moderate’ left (Castañeda 2006; Weyland 2006; Madrid 2010). The governments of President Lula and his successor Rousseff in Brazil, and President Lagos and his successor Bachelet in Chile, are considered as moderate, because they have maintained the economical framework as was created during the neoliberal era. Governments in Venezuela and Bolivia are on the other hand, considered as radical because of the far-reaching political and economic reforms. By focusing on the differences between extreme cases of left governments in Latin America, scholars have contributed to the categorization of different types of development models. However, relatively little systematic research has been conducted in the direction of explaining the differences between the so-called ‘moderate’ left in Brazil and Chile. In addition, there is a lack of research on the relation between the ideology and social policies of these moderate governments. The left governments in both Brazil and Chile have emphasized policy reforms to reduce poverty and inequality. Although extreme poverty has decreased

(6)

since, inequality rates remain one of the highest in the world. This comparative case-study can contribute to the understanding of this paradox by looking at external and internal factors which influence policy decisions. In this study it is argued that globalization reduces a government’s ability to introduce structural reforms. By integrating in the world market, states search for ways to be competitive. On the other hand, internal factors such as party system structure influences policymaking. Through the analysis of these elements this study seeks to contribute to the understanding of both the left ideologies of the current moderate countries Brazil and Chile in the theoretical debate of the influence of globalization and party structures on government’s autonomy.

In this study the following main question will be addressed: To what extent did the

new governments in Brazil and Chile stayed true to their left ideology when implementing social policy aimed at reducing poverty and inequality in the period 2000-2013?

In order to answer this question, three sub-questions have been formulated:

1. How have the PT in Brazil and the PS in Chile developed ideologically since their formation?

2. Which promises were made by the left governments of President Lagos and Bachelet in Chile and President Lula and Rousseff in Brazil to reduce poverty and inequality? 3. What measurements were taken by the left governments of Lagos, Lula, Bachelet and

Rousseff to reduce poverty and inequality?

In the following chapter the main theories and concepts, which form the theoretical framework of the study, will be explained. The concepts that will be emphasised are ideology, neoliberalism and social policy. In the second chapter the methodology will be explained in which the main concepts will be operationalized. The third chapter includes a historical-comparative analysis of the Workers’ Party in Brazil and the Socialist Party in Chile and the way they have developed ideologically. In the fifth chapter the results will be presented. The final chapter presents the conclusion in which the central question will be answered.

(7)

1. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

1.1 Introduction

This chapter provides the theoretical framework that allows analysis of the social policies implemented by the left governments of Brazil and Chile in the past fourteen years. To understand the nature of the social policies it is argued that the notion of ideology needs to be taken into account. The theory addressed here, opposes the post-ideology thesis which argues that with the ending of the Cold War, and the disintegration of the Soviet Union, neoliberalism was ‘the only game in town’. However, in this study it is argued that although neoliberalism remains to be the most globally dispersed ideology, left ideologies have not disappeared. Indeed, social policies of the left governments are rooted in ideas of the ‘old left’. The following section will elaborate on the concept ideology. Secondly, the so-called left turn will be addressed to understand the differences and similarities of the use of the left ideology in Latin America. The third section focuses on neoliberalism as the framework in which social policy is implemented. Simultaneously, possible constraints of an open economy for government’s ability to carry out their policies are discussed. Finally, this chapter will finish with a conclusion in which the theories and main concepts used in this research are mentioned briefly.

1.2 Ideology

The sudden disintegration of the Soviet Union and the breakdown of the Berlin wall in 1989 announced the end of the Cold War. The preceding period of the Cold War was marked by a world-wide confrontation between two distinct ideologies, liberalism and communism, each proclaiming a particular organization of society. Since the end of the Cold War, there has been a debate amongst scholars about the significance and importance of ideologies. Some scholars have argued that we are living in a ‘post-ideological’ era characterized by issue politics and movements (Beasley-Murray 2003; Rorty 1995; Zizek 1994). The post-ideological thesis is not new, as early as the 1960s a number of theorists proclaimed the decline of ideology, most notably Daniel Bell (1965) and Seymour Lipset (1959). They declared that the age of a dogmatic, or ideological, politics was over and a pragmatic era would emerge. However, the end-of-ideology thesis itself contained a strong political theme, which was anti-Marxist (Weltman and Billig 2001:368).

The post-ideology thesis is contested by the political scientist Schwarzmantel (2008). He argues that ‘totalistic’ ideologies of the 20th

(8)

fragmentation of society. However, this does not mean that ideologies are of no importance, rather ‘fragmented’ ideologies are currently prevailing. Schwarzmantel defines ideology as

“broad views of the nature of ‘the political’, and of the good society” (Schwarzmantel 2008:

25). These ideologies are totalistic in the sense that they present “a broad range of views

which cover the central aspects of how society should be, what forms of difference or differentiation between people should be accepted, and which rejected. In the widest possible sense an ideology thus offers answers to the question of what kind of society is desirable”

(Idem). Furthermore, ideologies seek to mobilize people in support of political projects designed to bring about a particular kind of society (ibid: 26).

The totalistic ideologies of the left and right of the 20th century, which emerged after the American and French Revolution, responded to the development of a new form of society, the competitive individualistic society of modernity. On the one hand, there was the opposition of the ‘free world’ articulated by liberal democracy, and on the other hand there was communism, a particular version of Marxism, which aspired to the rule of the producers and a rationally controlled society. Schwarzmantel argues that the historic project pursued by the ideologies of the left, mainly in classical Marxism, seeking a radical transformation of the existing order and the installation of new forms of community, has come up against the barrier of a more fragmented society (2008: 34). This has undermined the unity of the agency of change, the industrial proletariat, as well as making less desirable to create a communal society (idem). Consequently, it has led to a crisis of ideologies of socialism and of the left, because the social conditions under which they developed, have been transformed. Moreover, one ideology has dominated since then.

In present politics the fundamental concepts of liberalism, individual rights, individual choice, the limiting of state power and the important role of the market, are seen as essential and almost non-negotiable elements of a legitimate political system (Schwarzmantel 2008: 50). However, it is a particular form of liberalism, which is dominant in the contemporary world. Schwarzmantel argues that neoliberalism has gained influence in politics. He defines neoliberalism as:

A set of ideas, comprising the crucial role of the market as an all-pervasive institution, the value of the individual, seen often as consumer in the market place with such consumer choice being the highest example of freedom and autonomy, and the value of social institutions being judged in terms of productivity and measurable output, a form of commodification of all aspects of life (2008: 176).

(9)

The theory of neoliberalism emphasizes the relation between the autonomous individual and the market system. Geography professor David Harley notes that the role of the state within neoliberal theory is to create and preserve the institutional framework, which is characterized by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade (2007: 2). Furthermore, the state has to guarantee the quality and integrity of money, set up military, defence policy and provide legal structures that are able to secure property rights. If markets do not exists, in areas such as education, healthcare, social security, then they must be created, by state action if necessary (idem). However, state interventions in the market must be kept to a minimum. As a consequence of the dominance of neoliberalism, Schwarzmantel states that a variety of resistance and opposition has emerged which undermines its ascendance (2008: 38-39). These ‘ideologies of opposition’ are ‘old’ set of ideas, which are now seeking to adapt themselves to the present in order to be relevant to contemporary politics. Therefore, the ideologies of contemporary politics are a mixture of old and new ideas. Schwarzmantel labels these new ideologies as ‘fragmented’ or ‘molecular’ rather than ‘totalistic’, which seek alternative means to a more limited end rather than emphasizing a complete restructuring of society (ibid: 42). These molecular ideologies pick on a more fragmented or specific constituency, and focus not so much on total change as on a particular issue (idem).

In this study, it is argued, that one cannot understand political policies without understanding the ideas and visions that move people to political action. Moreover, these ideas are rooted in ideologies. The next section deals with the left ideology in Latin America after the Cold War.

1.3 Left in the contemporary world

In the previous part the concept of ideology was specified. The argument is that the old ‘totalizing’ ideology of socialism is in crisis and that they try to adapt to the contemporary world in the form of new ‘molecular’ form of ideologies. In the following part the new left in Latin America that came to power since the 1990s will be addressed. The focus will be on characteristics of the new left and its policy agenda. First, the causes of the left turn will be briefly addressed.

Between 1998 and 2010, left-of-centre governments came to power in almost every Latin American country. This phenomenon has been called the ‘Pink Tide’ by the media, referring to the moderate socialist and communist ideas, ‘the resurgence of the left’ (Levitsky and Roberts 2011) and the ‘left turn’ (Castañeda 2006). Moreover, the new left has been often divided in two categories in which the governments of Venezuela, Bolivia and

(10)

Argentina are seen as ‘wrong’ (Castañeda 2006: 29), ‘radical’ (Weyland 2006: 5) or ‘interventionist’ (Madrid 2010: 587). Castañeda characterizes the governments of these countries in terms of their political style. He considers them as populist, nationalist, strident and close-minded (2006: 29). Furthermore, the populist left is interested in maintaining its popularity at any cost, trying to get as much control as possible over revenue resources and fight with Washington (Ibid: 38). Weyland (2006) and Madrid (2010) on the other hand, put more emphasis on the economic and social agendas of these governments. They argue that this left reject neoliberalism, challenge the constraints arising from economic globalization, have boosted public spending and expanded state intervention in the economy, are critical of the United States, and push through ‘political reforms that strengthen the participatory, majoritarian features of democracy at the expense of political pluralism and liberal safeguards (Weyland 2006: 7). Ideology is considered to be a political strategy of these left governments for political gains.

The new left governments in Brazil, Chile and Uruguay are on the contrary considered as ‘right’ (Castañeda 2006: 29), ‘moderate’ (Weyland 2006: 5), ‘social liberalism’ (Levitsky and Roberts 2011: 24), and ‘liberal’ (Madrid 2010: 587). Castañeda argues that these governments are modern, open-minded, reformist, internationalist, and spring from the hard-core left of the past (2006: 29), which are the Marxist and communist ideologies. They emphasize social policy within a more or less orthodox market framework and have tried to deepen and broaden democratic institutions, on occasion fought corruption and maintain in general a good relationship with the United States (ibid: 35). His distinction is mainly based on economic performances, democratic values, programmatic achievements and the relation of the United States with the Latin American countries. Weyland (2006) and Madrid (2010) emphasize the economic strategies introduced by these governments which are market-oriented. Moreover, they argue that these governments negotiate reform with the domestic and international stakeholders of the established order instead of taking controversial measures. Levitsky and Roberts also distinguish between the left government of Uruguay, Brazil and Chile. Firstly they consider the left government of Uruguay as a ‘mass-organic’ party which maintains strong local branches, an active grassroots membership, and close ties to labour unions and other organized social constituencies. The left governments of Brazil and Chile are on the other hand considered as an ‘electoral-professional left’, which refers to the parties controlled by cadres with established careers in the business of politics and expertise in the management of electoral campaigns, legislative procedures, and

(11)

Professor in Latin American politics, Panizza (2005) argues that left-of-centre parties in Brazil, Chile and Uruguay have been influenced by the liberal-republican tradition. He continues to assert that the tradition stresses the importance of individual rights, the rule of law, public institutions and public-minded officials in both shaping and limiting political life. It rejects authoritarianism and privileges citizens’ rights and duties, stresses the fight against corruption and for electoral transparency (ibid: 721). The influence has been particularly important in parties that operate within strongly institutionalized party systems, such as the

Partido Socialista in Chile and the Partido dos Trabalhadores in Brazil. He considers them

therefore parties which are moving towards the European model of social-democracies. They have their roots in organizations of the working class and other popular sectors, are committed to reform rather than to abolishing capitalism through social policies that limit and correct the inequalities of the market, and socialism has become an ethical category rather than the active pursuit of a radical change of society (Panizza 2005: 95).

The left has always sought to carry through structural transformation with the goal of fulfilling the social needs of the popular majority and to advance its political participation. The left governments which have come to power recently, are also committed to equality, social justice, and popular participation. In contrast to the ‘old’ left, however, they accept the fundamental claim of the neoliberal right that the market system is best suited for producing prosperity. But in contrast to the right, the left does not find the automatic ‘trickle-down effect’1

sufficient. Therefore, state interventionism is seen as a requirement to distribute the gains of economic growth (Weyland 2006: 82). State intervention thus needs to compensate for market failures and support those who cannot succeed in the market. In the words of Weyland: “This nuanced position, which recognizes the market’s strengths as well as its

weaknesses, is the leitmotif of Latin America’s moderate, post-neoliberal Left: it embraces the market but moves beyond neoliberalism” (ibid). In this regard, scholars argue that the

moderate left have created a new development model (Weyland 2006; Roberts, 2007).

In sum, although scholars often emphasize different elements of the moderate left, most of them agree that these governments have lost the aspiration to abolish capitalism. Indeed, they operate within a ‘market-oriented’ framework in which they seek to implement social reforms in order to correct market-failure. In the following section, this framework will be addressed.

1

The “trickle-down effect” refers to the idea that tax breaks or other economic benefits provided to businesses and upper income levels will benefit poorer members of society by improving the economy as a whole.

(12)

1.4 Neoliberal reforms

The previous sector presents that rooted in socialist ideology, the contemporary left in Latin America is characterized by its concern about poverty and inequality. However, unlike the ‘old’ left, the moderate left in Brazil and Chile seeks to provide social welfare for its citizens while operating in a ‘market-oriented’ framework. The following section will elaborate further on this framework.

The emergence of the left governments is commonly seen as a reaction against the negative effects of the neoliberal reforms, which were implemented in most Latin American countries in the 1970s and 1980s (Castañeda 2006, 33, 28-30; Ramírez Gallegos 2006, 33; Cameron 2009; Baker and Greene 2011). According to the Latin American politics researcher, Kenneth Roberts, these reforms were a “critical juncture” that marked the transition from one era of development to another (Roberts 2007: 4). The 1950s and 1960s in Latin America had been marked by mass politics in which populist leaders pursued state-led models of capitalist development, known as import substitution industrialization (ISI) (ibid: 3). The policies led to economic growth in most developing countries during those years. However, during the late 1970s, most countries had to implement structural adjustment programs due to problems with macroeconomic stability and the ensuing economic crisis that occurred in the 1980s (Narula 2002: 12). In the aftermath of the 1982 debt crisis, ISI declined and neoliberal reforms were introduced to pursue macroeconomic stability. These reforms policies are generally known as the ‘Washington Consensus’, a term that was first introduced by Williamson after the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank allocated in Washington. These institutions introduced 10 ‘policy instruments’2

with the economic objectives of growth, low inflation, a viable balance of payments, and an equitable income distribution. Due to the reforms, an economic crisis occurred between 1998 and 2002. The recession in Latin America led to a negative per capita growth, increasing poverty and unemployment and the withdrawal of states form key areas of social protection, which eroded their ability to meet social demands (Levitsky and Roberts 2011: 9-10). Levitsky and Roberts (2011) argue that this ultimately created an opening for left governments since it eroded public support for the conservative governments and their neoliberal policies (ibid: 9-10).

Besides the negative results of neoliberal policies, other factors have been mentioned which have caused the left turn in Latin America, one of which is the long-term inequality

2_{Washington Consensus: Fiscal policy discipline, redirection of public spending, tax reform, interest rates}

that are market determined and positive, competitive exchange rates, trade liberalization, liberalization of inward foreign direct investment (FDI), privatization of state enterprises, deregulation and legal security

(13)

and the institutionalization of electoral competition (Levitsky and Roberts 2011: 7-9). Latin America is plagued by severe poverty and the income distribution is the most unequal in the world, therefore the electorate was receptive for the redistribution promises of the left. In the 1980s and 1990s, however, the credibility of the left was undermined due to a combination of inflation, fiscal crisis, weakened labour unions, and ideological disarray (ibid: 8). The failure of the state in the 1990s to respond to social needs, created an opportunity for left parties to ‘re-politicize’ inequality (Luna and Filgueira 2009). The other factor which caused the left turn, is the institutionalization of electoral competition (Castañeda 2006). Left political parties were during the military regimes of the 1960s and 1970s banned of political power or toppled by military coups. In Brazil this happened in 1964 and in Chile in 1973 when Salvador Allende was in power. This changed with the end of the Cold War and collapse of the Soviet Union. The revolutionary alternatives of the left parties largely disappeared, which diminished elite perceptions of the threats posed by leftist governments (Castañeda 1993 in: Levitsky and Roberts 2011: 8).

The international political economy, Professor Susan Strange (1996) argues, that in this respect the politics and the international market are intertwined. According to her power over policy outcomes is exercised impersonally by markets and often unintentionally by those who buy and sell deal in markets (Strange 1996: 12-13). Furthermore, authority in society and over economic transactions is “legitimately exercised by agents other than states, and

has come to be freely acknowledged by those who are subject to it” (idem). This forms a

problem because the fundamental reason for the justification of a governments’ power, is that it has to provide those goods which are not provided by the market: security, stable money for trade and investment, law and the means to enforce it, public goods like water, infrastructure, education and communication (Strange 2000: 50). Strange (2000) asserts that Latin America international market agents have played an important role in governments’ decision-making. In the 1980s, foreign European and Japanese firms were joining the Americans in setting up or buying affiliates in Latin America. When foreign bank loans dried up, the cost of debt service and repayment became a major problem for many countries and the reinvested profits of foreign firms were more than welcome (ibid: 50). By opening up the economies, under pressure of the IMF and the World Bank in the 1970s and 1980s, Latin American countries have increased their chances of competing successfully in exported manufactures. However, one of the consequences has been, an increased dependence on the financial and marketing services provided by large firms (ibid: 52). This point is also made by Panizza who argues that the global economy has led to; binding bilateral and multilateral

(14)

trade agreements; anti-discrimination rules that limit the countries’ scope for alternative trade and industrial policies; increased the need to access financial markets to finance public debt and investment; the leverage exercised by highly mobile financial capital on fiscal and macroeconomic policy; the volatile export price of commodities and its impact on trade balances and current accounts (Panizza 2009: 225). Governments are also aware of the power of international financial institutions and credit rating agencies (Panizza 2005: 95). This is seen in Brazil, in which the external debt exceeds 50 per cent of GDP, and therefore is highly committed to retaining the confidence of the markets.

1.5 Social redistribution

The following section presents a discussion on governments’ strategies to pursue their welfare goals. First, the concept of poverty will be briefly addressed.

Initially, poverty was seen as the consequence of low income in which the focus lied on wealth, consumption and earnings (Smith 2005; Burtless & Smeeding 2001). It was merely an economic approach on poverty in which the underlying assumptions was consumers tried to maximize their utility. Expenditures reflected then the utility people place on commodities (Ruggeri Laderchi et.al. 2003: 248). However, this economic definition became contested because it focused primarily on individuals and neglected other aspects of welfare and poverty. Over time, the definitions began to include additional factors such as a lack of education and healthcare (Misturelli et. al 2010: 40). The capability approach of Sen has been especially significant in the study of poverty. He notes that the deprivation of basic capabilities combined with low income, can contribute to poverty. Poverty is in this approach defines as the failure to achieve certain minimal or basic capabilities, where basic capabilities are “the ability to satisfy certain crucially important functioning’s up to certain minimally

adequate levels” (Sen 1993: 41). Or in other words, an individual’s substantive freedom to

live a ‘valued life’. Capability deprivation may be the result of particular factors such as age, illness, disability or (gender) inequality. Elements such as education and healthcare are therefore important to increase one’s capability. This approach moves beyond the economic approach in which monetary income is seen as the dominant indicator of poverty. However, while the capability approach incorporates individual factors into poverty definition, there are counter-arguments that emphasize institutional mechanisms that are more if not equally important since they impose barriers or offer opportunities in transforming capability into human well being.

(15)

During the 1990s, definitions of poverty changed. Poverty was described as multidimensional and collective frames replaced the individual perspective (Misturelli et. al 2010: 44). The concept of social exclusion became important in defining poverty. People may be poor even if they have basic needs, or even if they are capable of producing certain functioning. Social exclusion is defined as “the process through which individuals or groups

are wholly or partially excluded from full participation in society in which they live”

(European Foundation 1996: 5). The concept of social exclusion is used to explain poverty in broader contexts of social and institutional arrangements. It is important to take this concept into account because it focuses on the processes and dynamics that allow deprivation to arise and persist. However, states have tended to focus on the capabilities of individuals and families, in reducing poverty (Burton 2013: 196).

Burton (2013) argues that despite poverty’s multidimensional nature, governments in developing countries have tended to focus on reducing the capability aspects of poverty through the use of economic growth and social redistributive measures (2013: 196-197). In general, economic growth is seen as a necessary condition to reduce poverty. Perry et. al. (2006) argue that economic growth associated with progressive distributional changes will reduce poverty. They give two main reasons for this. Firstly, progressive distributional change will shift resources form the richer to the poorer and thus lead to poverty reduction. Second, poverty is more responsive to growth the more equal the income distribution (ibid: 57). According to them, economic growth and poverty forms a vicious circle in which poverty can also lead to lesser growth. The emphasis on either high growth rate or inequality-reducing policies is a political question on which the literature has not reached consensus. However, for governments operating within a market-oriented while simultaneously trying to achieve more equality, it is of importance to implement development strategies.

The question is what type of social policies is needed to accomplish the goals. Franzoni and Sánchez-Ancochea (2010) argue that social policies can include a broad set of redistributive measures, but that universal policies will tend to be especially effective. They give three reasons for this. First, individuals from all income levels and personal characteristics will end up sharing a similar treatment based on their conditions as citizens. Second, the middle class is more likely to support services it benefits from, whether these services are adapted for specific groups or the population at large. They argue that middle class support of universal policies also benefits low-income groups because of their mobilization capacity. Third, middle- and low-income alliance is helpful because it not only will lead to broad access to state policy, but it also guarantees good quality (ibid: 279).

(16)

However, Franzoni and Sánchez-Anchochea also state that in many cases the expansion of universal policies is not enough to guarantee access among low-income groups. Although insufficient, conditional cash transfer (CCT) programs can play a key role in reaching the poorest sectors in the country (idem). These programs provide target groups cash payments while restricted to certain conditions. Examples of these conditions are sending children to school or meeting basic preventive healthcare requirements.

Levitsky and Roberts (2011) mention several ways in which the left governments in Latin America have used social policy to pursue redistributive goals. The first approach is the increased expenditure on existing targeted programs and the creation of new targeted social programs to provide a broader range of public services and other benefits to disadvantaged groups. Another way in which left governments sought to achieve redistributive goals is by the coverage of existing social programs so that larger percentage of the population has access to benefits. Finally left governments have used new forms of labour market policies such as raising the minimum wage, facilitating collective bargaining, creating or expanding public employment programs, and reforming labour legislation to expand worker’s right and strengthen unions (ibid: 22-23). Thus, left governments use state power to remodel the distribution of income and economic opportunities in society.

Education and healthcare are often policy instruments used as conditionality. Perry et. al. (2006) argue that both can have a positive influence on poverty reduction: “education has

a very strong impact on earning potential, expands labor mobility, promotes the health of parents and children, and reduces fertility and child mortality” (idem: 120). According to

them, education is crucial to achieve sustained economic growth and poverty reduction while health can affect growth and income levels on a number of channels. Firstly, healthier workers are more productive. It plays an important role in determining the rate of return to education since children who are well nourished gain more from a given amount of education. Thirdly, healthier persons are more efficient in producing goods and services. And finally, increases in life expectancy have a direct effect on the average skill level of the population (ibid: 121). Kaufman and Nelson (2004) argue that besides the effect on sustained economic growth, education and health is also essential for reducing profound inequality and for raising the quality of democratic governance. For the individual, access to a good-quality education is the most likely route out of poverty (ibid: 5). Health on the other hand, has long been recognized as a major factor contributing to increased productivity, flexibility, and the capacity to complete in an integrated world economy (ibid: 2).

(17)

In sum, left governments have made poverty and inequality one of their priorities. Levitsky and Roberts have mentioned three different ways in which governments try to accomplish their goals. In the next section the influence of external and internal factors are described which influence government’s ability to implement these social policies.

1.6 Concluding remarks

In this chapter the theoretical framework that is used in this study was outlined. The chapter started with the post-ideology thesis, which announces ideologies of the 20th century to be expendable after the Cold War. In opposition to this thesis I have posited the theory of Schwarzmantel who argues that old ‘left’ ideologies are trying to adapt themselves to contemporary politics to maintain relevant. This has resulted in the emergence of what he calls ‘molecular’ ideologies whereby contemporary ideas are rooted in ideologies of the past. The theory is important to explain Latin American current left government’s ideas and policies. These governments came to power during the so-called ‘left turn’, and are in general divided between a ‘radical’ and a ‘moderate’ category. Moderate left governments have accepted neoliberalism as the framework in which they have to operate. However, an open economy led in the past to high poverty and inequality rates, furthermore it may constraint governments to pursue their political agenda. To overcome these problems, distributional measurements are taken in the form of social policies to alleviate the negative effects of an open market.

(18)

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1 Cases

In this research I will analyse left government’s efforts to implement social policies. The cases studied here are Brazil and Chile. Scholars have compared the left governments in these countries numerous times with other governments in Latin America that emerged during the left turn. The researchers focus mainly on the political economic strategies of governments, arguing that Brazil and Chile are moderate because they kept most of the market-oriented economic policies. However, these region-wide comparative studies have led to an oversimplification of the left governments in Brazil and Chile. Therefore, a comparative analysis of the left governments in Brazil and Chile, which came to power during the left turn, will contribute to the understanding of the similarities and differences in their efforts to implement social policies. The level of analysis is thus national and the units that are studied are the following governments of the left Presidents in both countries:

1. Ricardo Lagos in Chile from the Socialist Party 2000 – 2006.

2. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil from the Worker’s Party 2002 – 2006, 2006 – 2011. 3. Michelle Bachelet in Chile from the Socialist Party 2006 – 2010.

4. Dilma Rousseff in Brazil from the Worker’s Party 2011 – present.

The cases have been selected based on the left governments who came to power and who put great emphasis on combating poverty and inequality in their country while maintaining the economic structures that were established during the neoliberal era. Both countries have high rates of (extreme) poverty and Brazil is one of the most unequal countries in the world. It has been the left’s goal to seek to reduce poverty and inequality and include the marginalized in the political system. The political parties of the four Presidents that are analysed are well established in the political system of their countries. In the case of Brazil, the Partido dos

Trabalhadores (PT) came to power after the military regime, whilst in Chile the Partido Socialista de Chile (PS) re-established itself after the regime. Both the PT and the PS started

as radical leftist parties and moved over time ideologically to the centre-left. In power, the four Presidents have placed emphasis on helping the poorest sectors of their countries and set their goals to eliminate extreme poverty and reduce inequality. However, they have also accepted neoliberalism as the main framework in which to operate.

(19)

2.2 Data and method

The first part contains an historical analysis of the development of a left ideology within the

Partido Socialista in Chile and the Partido dos Trabalhadores in Brazil. The analysis starts

from the point the parties were created and ends at the point that Lagos in Chile and Lula in Brazil got elected as Presidents. For the analysis of the ideological position, the original manifestos were analysed using discourse analysis. These primary sources contain information about the parties’ ideology at its beginning. The questions asked during this process were, ‘How do they want to reduce poverty and inequality?’ and ‘What should the

role of the state be in this process?’ Besides the party ideology, the context of both countries

in which these political parties developed is analysed. Past events often have a significant influence on present political processes. The data used in this chapter is to a great extend gathered from Centro de Estudios y Documentacion Latinoamericanos (CEDLA) which has a large collection of literature on Latin America. The data was analysed using secondary document’s analysis and it was focused on institutional and economic developments, which have had an influence on the parties.

The chapter on the analysis of the cases consists of two sections. In the first section, an analysis is done on the left ideology of the four Presidents and their political parties. The focus will be on the promises made to the electorate. The data used in this section consists of the Governments’ programs in the period 2002-2013. In the case of Bachelet and Roussef, these primary sources were found online on their official websites. In the case of Lula the sources were found in the online database of one of Brazil’s most important newspaper Folha. And in the case of Lagos, the sources were found in an historical database. All documents were analysed in its original language (Portuguese and Spanish) and translated by the author of this thesis. These programs are the main document in which governments set out their ideas for the future of the country and make promises to the people. Their legitimacy is based on these promises and the actual policies. The government programs are analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis. The aim of content analysis is to attain a broad description of the phenomenon whereby the outcome consists of concepts or categories describing the phenomenon (Elo & Kyngäs 2007: 108). Elo and Kyngäs (2007) describe the steps of the process. The first step is the ‘open coding’ stage, which includes open coding, creating categories and abstraction (2007: 109). Abraham calls it ‘immersing’ yourself in order to ‘identify the themes that seem meaningful to the writers or producers of the texts’ (Abrahamson 1983: 286). Whilst reading the material, headings are written down in the margins to describe all aspects of the content, from which categories are freely generated at

(20)

this stage (idem). The second step is to group the lists of categories under higher order headings to reduce the number of categories by collapsing those that are similar or dissimilar into broader higher order categories (Idem: 111). The final step is the abstraction stage in which general descriptions are formulated through generating categories (Idem).

The second section contains an analysis on government’s social policies. Three areas were chosen to analyse: poverty, inequality, education and healthcare. As was shown in the theoretical chapter, poverty and inequality have been of great importance to both ‘old’ left parties and the new left parties in Latin America. The same holds for the provision of education and healthcare for the population. The limitation for this kind of analysis are the factors that are outside of control of the federal government, such as international crises, and actions by others such as families, companies, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (Neri 2007: 8). Nevertheless, it can be argued that the governments play an important role in facilitating and coordinating the agents. Moreover, the scope of this study is too limited to take all factors into account. The data used in this section is generated from the websites of the World Bank and TheGlobalEconomy.com that have a large amount of data on poverty and inequality in countries, and provides indicators for education and healthcare. The latter is an open educational resource on the world economy. However, data was often not complete. The World Bank for example missed data about poverty in Chile for many of the years after 2000. The author of this thesis has produced the figures and tables used here, from this data. Furthermore, data was gathered through secondary document’s analysis of relevant studies conducted in this field.

(21)

3. A HISTORY OF FORMING A POLITICAL LEFT

The purpose of the historical chapter is to explain the formation of the Partido dos

Trabalhadores in Brazil and the Partido Socialista in Chile. Such comparative-historical

research is necessary for a better understanding of the recent political processes in both countries. The focus will be on the ideological forming of the political parties within the context of issues such as military dictatorship, democratization, and neoliberalism. It is argued that over time, both parties moderated their ideology which led them to power. Moreover, structural change within the party system in Brazil and Chile are addressed to compare its effect on decision-making processes within Brazil and Chile. The historical chapter thus forms part of the analysis on the differences between the new left of Brazil and Chile. In explaining how the parties deal with constraints in policy making, one gains insight in their ability to form social policies which reduce poverty and inequality.

First, the emergence of the PT will be addressed within the political and economic context of Brazil in the 1980s. The ideological development of the party will be addressed by looking at factors which influenced its moderation. Next, the same analysis is done on the forming of the PS in Chile. Three periods were taken to explain the development of the parties: radical periods, the neoliberal era and the moderation period. The formation of the party’s ideology is analysed within this time framework. It is not argued that these are the only factors which influenced the party direction, but they did have an important impact on society. The comparative section will provide a comparison of the two cases and an answer will be given on the question why the political parties moderated their ideology. This chapter will finish with a conclusion.

3.2 Partido dos Trabalhadores

The PT was formed in a turbulent period in which Brazil was facing severe economic crisis and the transition to democracy. It emerged out of a strong social movement and which is seen as unique in Latin America (Keck 1992). In forming the party, both the political and economic environment played a key role.

From 1964 to 1985 Brazil was governed by military regimes. The regimes deposed elected president, repressed labour unions and imposed a moratorium on politics. Furthermore, it had two broad goals: to foster economic development and to rearrange politics (Hagopian 1996: 1). The objective for the economy was to seek to control inflation and attract foreign investments. In the longer term, they wanted to control the resources in

(22)

order to create a development project. To accomplish these immediate and long-term economic objectives, the military believed that changing the politics was necessary. Therefore, “popular sectors”, or the lower and middle class, had to be politically demobilized to moderate wage demands (idem: 2). Controlling inflation and labour militancy would, in turn, improve the climate for foreign investment. Moreover, control over the repatriation of profit was reduced and fiscal incentives and tax deductions implemented (Alves 1984: 73). However, the military established the arrocho salarial (wage policy) which led to the elimination of collective bargaining over salaries between workers and employers (idem). As a consequence, wages fell sharply between 1965-1969 and 1970-1971. Simultaneously, inequality increased whereby the richest 10 percent of the economically active population increased their share of the total national income from 39.5 percent in 1960 to 46.7 percent in 1970, and 50.9 percent in 1980, while the poorest 50 percent decreased their share from 17.4 percent in 1960 to 14.9 percent in 1970, and only 12.6 percent by 1980 (ibid: 74). The wage decrease had a severe impact on workers, and especially the poor people in Brazil.

The objective of the military regimes for the political system was to reform the way politics had traditionally been practiced in Brazil. The political system, which was characterized by political clientalism, occasional corruption, and inefficient allocation of public resources was in the eyes of the military an obstacle to economic growth ultimately political stability that needed to be rooted out of the state (Hagopian 1996: 2). Brazilian workers’ unions had been traditionally controlled by governments in a corporatist union structure. The leader of these unions normally worked together with the political leaders, and in specific the military regime which governed in Brazil from 1964 to 1985. When the Military President Ernesto Geisel started to initiate gradual liberalization of the regime in 1973, restoring some of the civil and political rights that had been suspended in the previous decade, broad-based movement started to emerge. The movement included political elites, professional associations, and a new militant sector of the labour movement and a range of social movements which were associated with the Catholic Church (Keck 1992). The different groups organized themselves within the framework of ‘The New Union Movement’ which formed the opposition to the military regime. In the late 1970s, the metalworker Luís Inácio “Lula” da Silva became the principle leader of this new union.

Between 1978 and 1979 Brazil witnessed a wave of strikes by workers from the heavy industrialized sector. By the end of the year, more than 500,000 workers were demanding increased wages, job security, working conditions and legislative measures to address labour

(23)

since 1929. The crisis was a consequence of the combination of the debt crisis, the exhaustion and delay in abandoning the import substitution industrialization strategy, the poor management of public finances by the military regime and the oil shocks (Lemanski-Valente 2001: 89).The discontent with the military regime was growing and the protest strikes of the workers achieved broader influence in Brazilian politics. In 1980, the military permitted independent political parties to form for the first time since the 1964 coup. The allowance of the multiparty competitions created opportunities for The New Union Movement and other grassroots popular movements to explore possibilities for a political party. Because the mainstream opposition parties had not supported the ongoing strikes, leaders of the New Union Movement sought to create their own party. In 1980 the PT was formed with Lula as its party leader. In a country where politics was previously elites dominated, it was a novelty that a party emerged through societal mobilization (Keck 1992; Hunter 2010: 22). Under Lula’s leadership, the PT’s labour-led project of social and political transformation became a successful new party. It played an active role in including people which had been marginalized in previous decades.

Radical period 1980-1989

Initially, the PT pursued a radical socialist program (Keck 1992: 246; Hunter 2010). However, the party leaders did not follow the Soviet model, but instead they had developed their own inward-looking development strategy (Hunter 2010: 28). The idea was to construct a ‘socialismo brasileiro’ since capitalism had not addressed the misery that existed in the country (idem). The PT proposed changes in the orientation of social and economic policy to benefit the less privileged. One of these social changes was the reshaping of the notion of class by increasing the number of working-class men and women in the legislative and executive branches, including Afro-Brazilians, women, and labour and community leaders (French and Fortes 2005: 19). By doing so, the PT contributed to weakening the hierarchical relations in Brazilian social relations. At Brazil’s 1988 constitutional convention, the PT advocated the nationalization of the country’s banks and mineral wealth, the repudiation of Brazil’s external debt and radical land reform (Samuels 2004: 1002).

Neoliberal policies

Since the late 1980s Brazilian economic policies shifted gradually towards neoliberalism. However, with the implementation of the real stabilization plan in 1994 by President Fernando Henrique Cardoso, neoliberalism was consolidated. The Real Plan focused on

(24)

macroeconomic stability through inflation targeting and economic growth through economic liberalization. These policies included high interest rates, financial, trade and capital account liberalization, the privatization of closure of state-owned productive and financial enterprises, de-indezation, currency overvaluation, fiscal and labour market reforms and the closure of several state agencies and departments (de Lourdes Rollemberg Mollo and Saad-Filho 2006: 103).

The outcomes of these policies were initially positive, real wages increased by 15 per cent in dollar terms in the mid-1990s (ibid: 104). It is widely argued that the wage increase and the new possibilities for consumers ensured Cardoso’s presidential election in 1994 and his re-election in 1998 (ibid: 104). “Cardoso presented his government as the harbinger of

‘modernisation’ and the standard-bearer of the ‘new globalised economy’” (idem). However,

during the 1990s economic growth was relatively low and vulnerable, with rising unemployment (Burden 2012: 201). Consumer goods rose and imports increased from US$27.8 billion in 1992 to US$43.1 billion in 1994 and US$75.7 billion in 1998. Trade balance however, shifted from a surplus of US$12.1 billion to a deficit of US$16.7 billion, over the same period (de Lourdes Rollemberg Mollo and Saad-Filho 2006: 104). To cover this, Brazil attracted more foreign direct and portfolio investments and loans. These inflows “triggered correspondingly large capital outflows in the form of debt service payments, profit

remittances, divestment and capital flight” (ibid: 110). These factors eventually led to the

financial crisis that Brazil entered in 1997-1998 which led to capital flight alongside a short recession in the United States.

The economic underperformance in the 1990s had a severe effect on employment. The capacity of the economy to create new jobs declined and national levels of unemployment and underemployment rose (idem). This led to the growth of poverty and marginalization during the neoliberal period. The pattern of inequality did not change under neoliberalism. Although the Gini coefficient declined marginally, from 0.61 to 0.59 between 1990 and 2001, this has only brought it back to the level of the lost decade in the 1980s (idem).

Transformation of the party

During the 1990s the PT was gaining more support from the people. They made steady electoral progress in legislative and municipal politics. Hunter (2010) argues that several factors contributed to its success. First of all, Brazil was facing a weak economy and an

(25)

movements. Furthermore, the party unified behind alternative positions on major economic and political cleavages and working only together with the left (ibid: 31).

However, during the 1990s the PT moved from its original radical position toward the centre. Hunter (2010) argues that Brazil’s political system gives incentives for presidential office rather than collective party decision making (ibid: 24). The strong position of the President requires candidates to capture a majority of votes in a runoff. Therefore Hunter argues “the majority requirement puts at greatest disadvantage those candidates furthest

from the political center, thereby providing an incentive for parties to undergo a centrist shift, especially in the second round” (idem). The institutional features of the party system in

Brazil, ultimately unleashed strong incentives for the PT to moderate its ideology (Hunter 2010: 25). The Marxist faction within the party continued a strong minority tendency while the ‘social democrats’ controlled the increasingly middle class party apparatus (Petras and Veltmeyer 2003: 10). On a formal level the program of the PT remained its radical demands, but in practice most of the newly elected Governors and Mayors did not challenge existing property relations (idem).

3.3 Partido Socialista de Chile

The Socialist Party in Chile was founded in 1933 and was the result of the fusion of various political groups of Socialist background of which the most important ones were: Nueva

Acción Pública, Acción Revolucionaria Socialista, Orden Socialista, Partido Socialista Marxista and Partido Socialista Unificado.

Radical period 1933-1973

In the first Declaraciones de Principios of the PS, it stated that it accepted Marxism as a method of interpretation of reality (Declaraciones de Principios 1933). However, the PS is characterized by a continuous ideological ambivalence which included Titoism, Maoism, Castroism and Peronism (Pollack 1978; Fernández Jilberto 2001: 61). Marxism has thus been a practical orientation and not a dogma. The variety of ideological tendencies within the Socialist Party is reflected in the different political alliances which the party joined or implemented which can be divided into three periods. The first coalition the PS joined was the Popular Front together with the Radical and Communist Parties. The political alliance united against the thread of fascism (bron). In this period there was a process of political democratization which involved progressive citizen participation with a party system (Garretón 1988). The state played a crucial role in evolving social democratization which

(26)

included extending social welfare benefits to the middle classes and to a lesser extent, organized labour (idem). Drake (1973) argues that the effort of the Socialist party to harmonize conflicting objectives and groups, reflect the dilemmas of a socialist movement in a late industrializing country which needed economic growth as well as social reform (ibid: 620).

The second period was between 1942 and 1956 when the PS joined the Frente de Acción Popular (FRAP) with the Communist Party. During this period, a capitalist import substitution industrialization strategy was implemented with a strong state presence in the economy. While the state continued to rely heavily on the copper sector for trade revenue, the country industrialized (Garretón 1988). In 1956 the PS started an alliance with the Communist party which would take Salvador Allende to the presidency in 1970.

This third period began in 1970 with the democratically elected Socialist president Salvador Allende and his Popular Unity coalition. The Socialist Party and the Communist Party formed the pillars during Allende’s ‘peaceful road to socialism’ (Robert 1995: 496). It also marked the period in which the Socialist party radicalized. They represented a more ‘revolutionary’ position within the coalition, while the Communists adopted a more cautious, moderate approach to political and socioeconomic change (idem). The Socialist Party favoured a narrow, class-based ‘Workers’ Front’ alliance and rapid economic socialization. During the Congress of Chillán in 1967, the party changed its political strategy towards one of armed struggle in order to consolidate a Socialist revolution (Garretón 1988). The Communist Party on the other hand, favoured multiclass political alliances, pragmatic changes in property relations, strict adherence to constitutional legality and negotiated compromise with opposition forces (Robert 1995: 496).

Neoliberal policies

In 1973 Salvador Allende was overthrown by a military coup by General Augusto Pinochet. The Socialist Party went into a long period of clandestine existence (1973-89). The Pinochet regime in Chile was the first to undertake a neoliberal revolution. They opened the economy to foreign trade, privatized nearly 500 firms, and liberalized capital and labour markets. The government achieved price stability and sustained growth rates for much of the 1980s, with the exception of a recession in 1982-1985. On the other hand, however, liberalization imposed a heavy price on the Chilean working class. Poverty increased from 17 percent to 45 percent between 1970 and 1985, and unemployment rose to 20-25 percent in the capital

(27)

The Christian Democrats and Socialist, including the PS, made an alliance who united around the presidential candidacy of Patricio Aylwin, the Concertación. One might expect that the Concertación would pursue a different policy, opposed to the policies of Pinochet’s government, but Aylwin pronounced (manifest) himself in favour of moderate alterations in the economic model.

The military reformed the educational system in 1981. One of the most striking reforms was the introduction of a universal educational voucher system, in which subsidy was paid to public and private schools on the basis of students’ enrolment, and families were free to choose among schools (Torche 2005: 321). Another important component of the reform was the decentralization of schools. Public spending on education dropped from 4.9 percent of the gross domestic product in 1982 to 2.5 percent in 1989 (idem).

Transformation of the party

The PS concluded after the military period that uncontrolled popular pressure had been a major factor in the fall of Allende. Therefore, the party kept their distance from party bases and popular organizations (Huber et. al. 2010: 80).

The main goals of the Concertación governments have been to protect macroeconomic stability, generate economic growth and employment, invest in human capital, and reduce poverty. To pursuit these goals they adopted conservative fiscal policies, strengthened the independence of the Central Bank, deepened Chilean integration in the world markets, increased expenditure for education and health care, increased the minimum wage, and provided targeted programs for those in extreme poverty (ibid: 82).

3.4 Concluding remarks

The question in this chapter was how the left parties of current left presidents in Brazil and Chile had developed over time and more importantly, why these parties have moderated their ideology. Some important factors have been mentioned which have had an impact on both political parties: military dictatorship, neoliberalism and institutional party system. This section provides an explorative account that can improve the understanding of the subjects against their historical development. The formation of the PT and the PS present a number of similarities. First of all, both the PT as the PS started with a radical socialist party ideology calling for far-reaching policies to include the marginalized sectors in society. Furthermore, both parties (re)emerged during the process of redemocratization, unifying political groups which already existed within society.

(28)

4. REDUCING POVERTY AND INEQUALITY IN BRAZIL AND CHILE

In the late 1990s the left populist leader, Hugo Chavez won the Presidential elections. Soon other leftist Presidents would follow in the rest of Latin America. The first leftist President to emerge in Brazil was Lula and in Chile it was Lagos. They assumed presidency in periods of economic concern. In 2000, Chile was confronting the effects of the Asian crisis and the first negative results of economic growth after the democratic period, with a large impact on unemployment. Brazil was facing in 2003 destabilization of the inflation, the change of the market’s confidence, partly because of foreign investor’s reaction on Lula’s electoral success. In response to this situation, the new governments pledged to implement social policies to alleviate the consequences of these crisis.

In this chapter the central research question will be answered in two steps. The first part will concentrate on the left ideology of the governments of Lagos, Lula, Bachelet and Rousseff. The section focuses on the promises these governments have made regarding poverty and inequality reduction. Promises for a better educational and health system are also taken into account since it is seen as fundamental for the well-being of people. Simultaneously, ideas about how to organize the economy are also analysed to put the social policies into context. The purpose of this section is to compare the ideologies of the four governments with each other and with the old ideologies of the past. The second part will focus on the actual policies implemented by the four governments to reduce poverty and inequality and to encourage education and health. The purpose of this section is to compare and analyse whether there is discrepancy between the ideology and social policies. This chapter will end with a comparative analysis.

4.2 The rise of a new left ideology

This section will in the first place analyse the promises that the new left governments in Brazil and Chile have made regarding poverty and inequality reduction. These promises are analysed by comparing them with the old ideologies of the left. To what extent have the new left governments kept the origins of the old left ideologies of socialism? What is ‘left’ in these left governments?

(29)

4.2.1 The case of Brazil

The historical development of the PT in Brazil shows that they started from a radical strategy aiming at constructing a ‘socialismo brasileiro’ which would include the marginalized people. However, once in power both Lula and Rousseff left their socialist starting point. Instead, ‘social inclusion’ was pursued for the poorest sectors of the population, while simultaneously pursuing economic growth, inflation control and tight fiscal and monetary policies.

Election Lula 2003

Lula assumed office in January 2003. It was the first time a left-of centre socialist candidate got elected with 61% support of the Brazilian electorate. However, it was also the first time that no reference was made to ‘socialism’. His promises during the campaign were two-fold: more rapid social progress and macroeconomic stability with equitable growth. The central theme of his government program A Brazil for Everyone. Growth, Employment and Social

Inclusion3was social inclusion in which Lula pledged to build a ‘new social contract’. The elements of this social contract were the deepening of the democratization of society, fighting authoritarianism, inequality and clientalism, inclusion of historically marginalized sectors and the deprivatization of the state. Furthermore, civil liberties, human rights and economical and social justice would be central (governments’ program Lula 2002). This new social contract would have to lead to social inclusion of 52 million Brazilians living in poverty (ibid: 1-7).

One of the main promises made by Lula was to combat hunger. Through the project

Fome Zero (Zero Hunger) Lula aimed at reducing hunger amongst the poorer families. On

the field of education, priority was given to young children to assure pre-school care and enrolment in school. Furthermore, the aim was to restructure the educational system into a national system. The poorest part of the population would be able to attend university education through a system of scholarships (ibid: 46).

On the field of macroeconomy, Lula hold to the model inherited before 2003. Indeed, his ideas about the economic system did not differ much from the previous governments which pursued neoliberal reforms. The program contained intentions to control inflation through tight fiscal and monetary policies. However, Lula tried to include a social note to its vision of economic growth by stating that and an ‘alternative development model’ would be constructed to “confront and beat the historical challenge of social exclusion requires the

3_{‘Um Brasil para Todos. Crescimento, Emprego e Inclusão Social.’}

The left turn in Latin America and its consequences for social change : a comparative study of Brazil and Chile