Talk:Liberalism and conservatism in Latin America

Untitled

Could be named something less verbose than Comparison and Contrast of liberalism and conservatism in Latin America? Perhaps Liberalism and conservatism in Latin America? Wmahan. 07:54, 2004 Apr 14 (UTC)

The article is pretty awful, in any case. But Liberalism and conservatism in Latin America would make mor esense. john 07:56, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

economic and social liberalism

This article does require some serious revision. It is important to highlight the difference between liberal in the social sense and liberal in the economic sense. While independence heroes such as Simon Bolivar were interested in transforming the social structure and creating a political system that recognized individual rights (social liberal), part of the push for independence came from large Hacienda owners who were interested in comercializing their products with trading partners such as England who would pay a higher rate that what the colonial authorities in Spain and Portugal would offer. In this regard, the interest for independence responded to a desire to remove trade barriers (economic liberal) without necessarily addressing changes in the social structure.

I am not an expert on 19th century politics, but my knowledge for 20th century is that social liberal movements in Latin America for the most part have to do with social democracy, or, most commonly, communism and/or anarchism. Liberal feminism get unnoticed for long time, and only recently there was actually a clash of interests from the newborn American-influenced pro-capitalist/right-wing libertarians and the older generation of leftists. Before it, neoliberal policies (and economically liberalism in a general manner) were identified with the non-libertarian Right.

Actually, my experience with Mises Brasil (biased one, since I am anarchist and as long I understand it a 'communist', I have to say) was that Brazilian libertarians, unlike their American counterparts, are still very connected with conservatism in a lot of ways. For example, people can question or label as 'cultural marxism' feminism, multiculturalism and sexuality- and gender identity-based cultures (or the movements supporting it) here as a whole and after it denying that they are part of the conservative Right just defending economically liberal values (funny fact that neocons and libertarians here are kind of homies). Oh, please, they are echoing the insane common sense which formed in the Right both here and in the West without even trying to be reasonable or fair with leftist/progressist viewpoints, or just trying to be not that kind of stereotypical whining right-winger.

Obviously the local Lefts (and I am not talking about the much more moderate Pink Tide and their supporters; e.g. one can not really make a left-wing government in Brazil due to the many conflicts of interests in our politics, for that reason Lula and Dilma are actually in the centre) take their part of this situation and liberal became associated with something really, really bad for everyone (a wolf in the peel of a lamb, a conservative pretending to be progressist for not being labeled... well, the things which right-wingers are labeled in certain Western cultures hit by many bloody dictatorships and economic crisis led by neoliberalism with support of certain governments of developed economies and international organizations, and with unresolved historical class, race/ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc. conflicts). For reasons like this, interpreting these terms in Latin America can be very confusing nowadays.

SO for practical purposes, dividing Latin American politics into simple Left and Right just after the independence wars and before the 1970s is much easier. Lguipontes (talk) 11:18, 26 April 2012 (UTC)