The years following the turn of the millennium represented a seismic shift in the scope of Brazilian politics. After running on behalf of the Brazilian Workers’ Party, otherwise known as the PT (Partido dos Trabalhadores), since the mid-1980s, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (Lula) finally became elected in 2002, winning a landslide runoff election over José Serra of the Social-Democratic Party. As Lula assumed office and control over the government, he was confronted by an assortment of challenges facing Brazil in transforming itself from a developing to a developed country while in the process instilling democratic values. Brazil’s first challenge under Lula involved overcoming a history marred in inequality across all sociological mediums. Renowned
…show more content…
When Lula assumed office, illiteracy rates in the Northeast region of Brazil hovered at just over seventeen percent, more than double the national average (Hagopian/Power 479). Not coincidentally, the Northeast region of Brazil has historically been the poorest region of Brazil. Lula’s government was challenged with reforming the educational system, and improvements under Lula will be expanded upon later. Unfortunately; however, the modern education system in Brazil still feeds into a vicious circle aimed to elevate the wealthy higher and sink the impoverished lower. Hagopian and Power state, “In 2010, the Ministry of Education spent $6.50 on universities and laboratories for every $1 directed to basic education. In effect, this policy subsidized the higher education of children of the upper-middle and even upper classes, who could afford to pay” (Hagopian/Power 508). Essentially, the system rewards those who can afford college and punishes those who cannot. As access to education remains one of the foundations of democracy, at least according to political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset, Brazil’s quest to reinvent itself as a leading democracy may remain undermined by its inability to implement a fair education …show more content…
Prior to the 2002 elections, aforementioned issues such as income inequality and corruption undermined democratic progress. Internally, voters recognized the importance of electing a leader without a history of corruption, as well as a leader capable of correcting the withstanding problems in Brazil. Lula, from the PT, became this figure. In the 2002 election, Lula’s vote base was composed mostly of a middle and upper class electorate. This vote base was resultant of Lula’s connection to the PT, which historically garnered support from workers (middle class) and was thought to be somewhat of an intellectual party (Brooks). Externally, there were concerns surrounding the 2002 election. Internationally, concerns revolved around Lula’s ability to manage the economy. The IMF and World Bank initially expressed a lack of faith in Lula; however, he had earned the trust of the two organizations by the end of his first term in office.
The two most important measures taken during Lula’s first term in office in terms of impact on electoral base instilling sustainable democracy were the economic decisions to maintain a surplus and the social programs, specifically Bolsa Familia. First, Lula became a global ally of the major economic organizations. Hagopian and Power
When Lula assumed office, illiteracy rates in the Northeast region of Brazil hovered at just over seventeen percent, more than double the national average (Hagopian/Power 479). Not coincidentally, the Northeast region of Brazil has historically been the poorest region of Brazil. Lula’s government was challenged with reforming the educational system, and improvements under Lula will be expanded upon later. Unfortunately; however, the modern education system in Brazil still feeds into a vicious circle aimed to elevate the wealthy higher and sink the impoverished lower. Hagopian and Power state, “In 2010, the Ministry of Education spent $6.50 on universities and laboratories for every $1 directed to basic education. In effect, this policy subsidized the higher education of children of the upper-middle and even upper classes, who could afford to pay” (Hagopian/Power 508). Essentially, the system rewards those who can afford college and punishes those who cannot. As access to education remains one of the foundations of democracy, at least according to political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset, Brazil’s quest to reinvent itself as a leading democracy may remain undermined by its inability to implement a fair education …show more content…
Prior to the 2002 elections, aforementioned issues such as income inequality and corruption undermined democratic progress. Internally, voters recognized the importance of electing a leader without a history of corruption, as well as a leader capable of correcting the withstanding problems in Brazil. Lula, from the PT, became this figure. In the 2002 election, Lula’s vote base was composed mostly of a middle and upper class electorate. This vote base was resultant of Lula’s connection to the PT, which historically garnered support from workers (middle class) and was thought to be somewhat of an intellectual party (Brooks). Externally, there were concerns surrounding the 2002 election. Internationally, concerns revolved around Lula’s ability to manage the economy. The IMF and World Bank initially expressed a lack of faith in Lula; however, he had earned the trust of the two organizations by the end of his first term in office.
The two most important measures taken during Lula’s first term in office in terms of impact on electoral base instilling sustainable democracy were the economic decisions to maintain a surplus and the social programs, specifically Bolsa Familia. First, Lula became a global ally of the major economic organizations. Hagopian and Power