Lula and Bush: Two Viewpoints

Whoever follows the speeches of President Lula and President Bush live, one after the other, cannot avoid making a comparison. They are two different and opposite universes, two ways of reading the present history of humanity in its planetary phase — one symbolizing creation and hope, the other, security and fear.

Lula represents the idea of an open world order, characterized by "confidence in the human capacity to evolve towards superior ways of living together" and that welcomes "the greatest and most beautiful challenge — that of becoming more human." This potential utopia is built by all, through ongoing dialogue, solidarity from the base, and an ethos of compassion for the millions and millions of victims who suffer poverty and hunger. Lula preached the only possible revolution in an era of globalization — one not anchored in ideologies or conventional politics but in a coalition of ethical and moral forces, a coalition based on humanitarian sensitivity and emotional intelligence, that is to say, on those dimensions that mobilize people and lead them to effective change.

Because of this new way of doing politics, he suggested the restructuring of the United Nations to confer on it the full authority to resolve conflicts and establish policies of peace. He proposed the creation of a World Committee to Fight because "the real road to peace is the relentless struggle against hunger" "in the only war from which we will all emerge as winners." And to the extent that the world's social problems are solved, the reasons that sustain world terrorism will be invalidated. Fighting political terrorism with state terrorism is an obvious mistake. World social justice is the only response to terrorism.

Bush has made himself the spokesperson for a system closed in on itself, threatened by terrorism and, therefore, dominated by fear. Starting from scenarios belonging to fundamentalist reasoning, he posited a polarization between order and chaos, civilization and barbarism. For him there is no other possible alternative. The United States, representing order and civilization, (unilaterally) declared an unlimited war on terrorism and those who support it, such as Afghanistan under the Taliban, and Iraq under Saddam Hussein. However, his invectives lose credibility when we know that the United States trained Bin Laden in terrorism (against the Russians) and that it gave Saddam Hussein weapons of mass destruction. The denunciation of world organized crime and child sex abuse — as abominable as these are — did not go beyond a moralizing attitude, touching only on the punishment that should be imposed without identifying the causes to be fought against. The latter can be found in the dominant culture, hegemonized by the United States, which, in its desire to induce consumption, transforms everything from sex to the Holy Spirit into a commodity, stimulates all instincts and eroticizes all products. With this brew, how can crime astonish us?

There was no place in his speech for multilateralism, dialogue or cooperation unless it consolidated or rebuilt the current order.

Which of the two inspires a more beneficent future for humanity — Bush, or Lula? History has shown that the future is on the side of dreams — not just any dream but the dream that is translated into reality, as in the case of Lula.

Free translation from the Spanish provided by AnneFullerton@mybluelight.com. Done in Arlington, VA in cooperation with Refugio del Rio Grande, Texas.