This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Europe "Crosses Rubicon" As Portugal Usurps Democracy, Bans Leftist Government
On Thursday evening, we took a close look at how the political landscape has changed in Portugal following inconclusive elections held earlier this month.
For those unaware, the worry in Brussels has always been that either Spain, Portugal or, in a less likely scenario, Italy, would go the way of Greece by electing politicians that would seek to roll back austerity, shun fiscal rectitude, and demand debt relief.
As we’ve noted on any number of occasions over the past nine months, that’s why Berlin adopted such a hardline approach to negotiations with Alexis Tsipras and Yanis Varoufakis. There was never any hope of setting Athens on a “sustainable path.” It was always about deterring more “meaningful” states from going the Syriza route.
Well as it turns out, the troika’s efforts to subvert the democratic process in Greece by using the purse string to overthrow the government apparently did not deter the Portuguese leftists. Put differently, the ATM lines, empty shelves, and gas station queues Greece witnessed over the summer have not had their intended psychological effect in Portugal as Socialist leader Antonio Costa announced earlier in the week that he’s prepared to align with the Communists and with Left Bloc to form a government in defiance of the Right-wing coalition. The Left alliance would have an absolute majority in parliament and would likely adopt an anti-austerity, and perhaps even an anti-euro, platform.
In an effort to head off this eventuality, President Anibal Cavaco Silva appointed Pedro Passos Coelho to serve another term as PM on Thursday. That was a slap in the face for Costa, and as we noted just moments after the announcement, Silva’s decision is likely to leave Portugal mired in an intractable political stalemate which is just about the last thing Europe needs as Brussels attempts to put the Greek debacle in the rearview while confronting the worsening refugee crisis.
Sure enough, Costa is now threatening to topple the government on the heels of what is widely viewed as an usurpation of democracy. Here’s Reuters:
Portugal's opposition Socialists pledged on Friday to topple the centre-right minority government with a no-confidence motion, saying the president had created "an unnecessary political crisis" by nominating Pedro Passos Coelho as prime minister.
The move could wreck Passos Coelho's efforts to get his centre-right government's programme passed in parliament in 10 days' time, extending the political uncertainty hanging over the country since an inconclusive Oct. 4 election.
This set up a confrontation with the main opposition Socialists, who have been trying to form their own coalition government with the hard left Communists and Left Bloc, who all want to end the centre-right's austerity policies.
"The president has created an unnecessary political crisis" by naming Passos Coelho as prime minister," Socialist leader Antonio Costa said.
The Socialists and two leftist parties quickly showed that they control the most votes when parliament reopened on Friday, electing a Socialist speaker of the house and rejecting the centre-right candidate.
"This is the first institutional expression of the election results," Costa said. "In this election of speaker, parliament showed unequivocally the majority will of the Portuguese for a change in our democracy."
Antonio Barroso, senior vice president of the Teneo Intelligence consultancy in London, said Costa was likely to threaten any Socialist lawmaker with expulsion if they vote for the centre-right government's programme.
"Therefore, the government is likely to fall, which will put the ball back on the president's court," Barroso said in a note.
And here’s more from The Telegraph on the effort to undercut the democratic process:
Portugal has entered dangerous political waters. For the first time since the creation of Europe’s monetary union, a member state has taken the explicit step of forbidding eurosceptic parties from taking office on the grounds of national interest.
Anibal Cavaco Silva, Portugal’s constitutional president, has refused to appoint a Left-wing coalition government even though it secured an absolute majority in the Portuguese parliament and won a mandate to smash the austerity regime bequeathed by the EU-IMF Troika.
He deemed it too risky to let the Left Bloc or the Communists come close to power, insisting that conservatives should soldier on as a minority in order to satisfy Brussels and appease foreign financial markets.
Democracy must take second place to the higher imperative of euro rules and membership.
“In 40 years of democracy, no government in Portugal has ever depended on the support of anti-European forces, that is to say forces that campaigned to abrogate the Lisbon Treaty, the Fiscal Compact, the Growth and Stability Pact, as well as to dismantle monetary union and take Portugal out of the euro, in addition to wanting the dissolution of NATO,” said Mr Cavaco Silva.
“This is the worst moment for a radical change to the foundations of our democracy.
"After we carried out an onerous programme of financial assistance, entailing heavy sacrifices, it is my duty, within my constitutional powers, to do everything possible to prevent false signals being sent to financial institutions, investors and markets,” he said.
Mr Cavaco Silva argued that the great majority of the Portuguese people did not vote for parties that want a return to the escudo or that advocate a traumatic showdown with Brussels.
This is true, but he skipped over the other core message from the elections held three weeks ago: that they also voted for an end to wage cuts and Troika austerity. The combined parties of the Left won 50.7pc of the vote. Led by the Socialists, they control the Assembleia.
The Socialist leader, Antonio Costa, has reacted with fury, damning the president’s action as a “grave mistake” that threatens to engulf the country in a political firestorm.
“It is unacceptable to usurp the exclusive powers of parliament. The Socialists will not take lessons from professor Cavaco Silva on the defence of our democracy,” he said.
Mr Costa vowed to press ahead with his plans to form a triple-Left coalition, and warned that the Right-wing rump government will face an immediate vote of no confidence.
Note what's happened here. The will of the people is now being characterized as a "false signal" to "financial institutions, investors, and markets."
In other words, what voters want means nothing. This is about what "markets" and "financial instiutions" want. What the electorate wants is nothing more than a "false signal."
This is precisely what we predicted would happen should the political situation in Portugal not unfold in a way that pleases Berlin and Brussels. Germany and, to a lesser extent, the IMF are now in complete control of the European political process. There's no "democracy" left. It's either get with the austerity program and stick with it, or face the consequences which, as we saw with Greece, could entail the closure of banks and the willful destruction of the economy.
We can however, take solace in the fact that Cavaco Silva's attempts to appease financial markets will invariably backfire, because if there's anything investors hate, it's uncertainty and the move to reappoint Passos Coelho will only serve to bring about a protracted political conflict with the Left. Watch Portuguese bond yields next week for hints as to whether the President's decision has achieved the stated goal of calming "investors" and "markets."
We'll close with the following quote from The Telegraph's Ambrose Evans-Pritchard:
Mr Cavaco Silva is effectively using his office to impose a reactionary ideological agenda, in the interests of creditors and the EMU establishment, and dressing it up with remarkable Chutzpah as a defence of democracy.
The Portuguese Socialists and Communists have buried the hatchet on their bitter divisions for the first time since the Carnation Revolution and the overthrow of the Salazar dictatorship in the 1970s, yet they are being denied their parliamentary prerogative to form a majority government.
This is a dangerous demarche. The Portuguese conservatives and their media allies behave as if the Left has no legitimate right to take power, and must be held in check by any means.
These reflexes are familiar – and chilling – to anybody familiar with 20th century Iberian history, or indeed Latin America. That it is being done in the name of the euro is entirely to be expected.
»
- 64615 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
This is not new in the so-called western democracy. The PCI Italy communist party won every elections (few times with PSI) for over forty years and they were never asked by the president of the republic to form a government or asked to join any ruling coalition resulting in 39 minority governments in 40 years.
This is the fakery called democracy in the west and proves futility of voting.
What we need is a boycott. It works. See how.
https://contrarianopinion.wordpress.com/notes-on-buddy-politics/
"The PCI Italy communist party won every elections... "
misleading statement
most people would understand they got a majority of votes where they just got most votes, which is a completely different affair in most european countries, the very thing highlighted by the fact that at the end every government was formed by a coalition of parties that together have a majority of seats in parliament
"...resulting in 39 minority governments in 40 years..."
utterly false, a minority government would be one that does not have a majority in parliament. 39 out of 60+? come on, pull the other one, it has bells on
Yes and No.
The duty of whoever presides over the election is to first invite the leader of the party with the most seats, to try and form a government. Unless this coaltion of left wing parties had entered the election as a single 'party', they aint first, whether we or they like it or not.
Once the leading party admits they can't find enough partners to form their own coalition government, then it falls to the leader of the second party to get his chance.
You should read up on how the Israeli minority parties hustle and bargain with the bigger parties after their elections, since generally every government there is an uneasy truce of a group of parties, including some prettey extreme nut-jobs. This time round, Netenyahu is controlling a group of 4 parties, 3 of whom could combine and outvote him if they wanted.
Poor journalism here, getting to be a habit. Whilst there may be desperation in the Portugese establishment, there is a procedure they have to follow, and this is it. Costa will get his chance within a few days. He is currently puffing out his chest for his own propaganda reasons, since he wants to show his own alliance who is boss in their team.
+1, indeed Israel is an excellent example on how this process work as per constitutional setup
+1 for "Poor journalism here, getting to be a habit... "
Citizens Are Not People And Have NO Rights.
They are slaves to do what "the leaders" say they must do, nothing else....
Until humans wake up and start acting, whenever that will be.... 10 years? 25? 50? 100? Never??
PS trying to form a new government with a combination of parties is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same thing as starting to govern with a program...some posters are a bit wrong.
"Citizens Are Not People And Have NO Rights"
where?
your statement without a precise location in space and time has no value whatsoever
You can probably use Britain as a good example. There is no proper constitution, democracy amounts to little more than an elected dictatorship by the minority, police are increasingly out of control with incidents of armed police killing people on the rise and the so-called rights that Brits have can be - and are being - salami-sliced away by statute law year on year.
The big assault on liberties began under the fascist HRH Tony Blair, continued under the coalition government of Cameron and has continued with a new lust under the current Cameron government. Witness Cameron's stated intention to abolish encryption on the Internet. Witness Theresa May's introduction of legislation to attack Non-violent Extremists (NVEs) which will include bloggers and anybody who dares to speak out. It goes on and on.
possibly, I won't go there. technically, you Britons aren't even that sure if your isles are really part of Europe or not, but this article is very specific about Portugal
and Portugal has a written constitution, and this written constitution is pretty "standard", as continental european constitutions go
this does not stop an Englishman like you to moan about foreign affairs as if they would have to be done in the British manner, as per British custom, as we can both read in the other exchange we had in this very same comment section, further above
frankly, I see again a typical situation here. You Britons aren't happy with your systems, pass nevertheless a lot of time moaning about other systems... more
and this without actually caring to check the details of the other systems. this reinforces this continental's prejudices that you do not care about shit as long as you can moan
and this "do not bother me with details" is something you even exported to the US. a proper Englishman or American would be ashamed to be found proficient in his understanding of ideologies, politics and constitutional matters, eh? with the American topping of being slightly ashamed if found being voting, eh?
I am probably failing in sounding courteous, here, and I regret it then I find you a good man to talk about things... as long as they don't belong to the above categories.
but seriously, there is something in your very culture that prevents a serious discussion about those things, imho
this is coupled with another prejudice of mine: that even while you attack the fact that the UK has no written constitution... if the question was "should european continental countries adopt the British polical system (including the unwritten constitution)"... you'd be on the other side of the barricades. in the sense of "Right or Wrong, My Country, By Jingo!"
+1 for "Witness Theresa May's introduction of legislation to attack Non-violent Extremists (NVEs)... ", as per Cameron saying lately: "It's not enough...". Interestingly, Cameron is himself attacking that part of the British political culture with that. very strange, imho, or perhaps he really did not think about it
"...and this "do not bother me with details" is something you even exported to the US. a proper Englishman or American would be ashamed to be found proficient in his understanding of ideologies, politics and constitutional matters..."
Now wait just a damned minute there!
No...on second thought...you two go right on ahead with the self mutilation, it's kinda nice seeing other western countries ripping themselves to shreds for a change, instead of picking over the bones of this one.
But do hurry on and get to the conquest/empire history lesson and the guilt trip phase and how you guys are going to commit your governments to taxing the living shit out of yourselves as "restitution" to the societies & cultures your forefathers destroyed and/or mutilated over the centuries.
That's always my favorite part ;-)
mnewn, I gave up and posted above a comment with the specifics of this election
but I'll cut and paste them here:
-----
the specifics of this election and this parliament are this: one party got 107 seats, another 86, another 19, another 17 and another 1
a majority would be 116 votes out of a total of 230
the Portuguese President asked the leader of the one party that won 107 seats to form a government, to be approved or not by the Portuguese Parliament
further, "The President of Portugal has the power to dissolve the Assembly of the Republic by his own will. Unlike other countries the President can refuse to dissolve the parliament at the request of the Prime Minister or the Assembly of the Republic and all the parties represented in Parliament. If the Prime Minister resigns, the President must nominate a new Prime Minister after listening to all the parties represented in Parliament and then the nominee must be confirmed by the Assembly of the Republic. "
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_legislative_election,_2015
-----
do you understand? the Portuguese constitution is very clear about the process that the Portuguese President has to follow
from a constitutional point, he has done his duty to the very letter of the constitution, up to now
yes, he could have asked one of the leader of the left to form a coalition of the left
no, he is within his rights and duties to ask the leader of the biggest party first (and in fact it's even a sensible and quite usual approach)
if he does not like the outcome and parliament is not clearly united in this, he can just dissolve this parliament, and new elections follow
as per Portuguese Constitution
what we have here is a very common instance of a political crisis that the very constitution envisions as common, and for which it has a procedure which again is very common among republics based on the proportional election methods (i.e. most european countries), which usually result in several parties represented with no party able to claim the popular mandate alone
our British cousins don't have a written constitution and have a "winner takes all" election method (FPTP) which is a completely different system
you, our American cousins, have a written constitution but otherwise share with the Brits the FPTP election method
we have a smattering of understanding of how your systems work. they are, after all, way older and simpler
you, both Brits and Americans, are often bewildered about ours. they are, after all, way younger and more complex
hence this article and the comments
People following law & constitutions are wonderfully cohesive things for the sheeple to believe in, right up to the point where they're used against the people by the powerful.
You still hold out hope that men (and women) can peacefully control their own governments through voting, regulation, enforcement and "law"...I do not. Merkel went against the desires of her own people, Cameron against his, Obama against ours.
Be careful playing around with laws & constitutions, you may get more than what you asked for ;-)
nmewn, can I fairly categorize you as one of the original denizens of ZH, i.e. a libertarian bordering to the anarchic that does not believe in constitutions?
if yes, remember that you still have my full sympathy. I think that "you guys" bring excellent criticism
but that's all. do you have better methods that can be fairly recognized as "tested"?
take this: "Merkel went against the desires of her own people"
the way I see it the will of her own people on that is still quite undecided
but the system that brought her to lead could anytime throw her down, then she is one vote of "non-confidence" in the elected German parliament away from retirement
ergo she is leading because the German Parliament is behind her, until new elections
can you recall Obama in any way? or did you read any constitution besides your own?
Certainly there's a mechanism to impeach him but it doesn't make much difference when it's not used. Lying openly used to be an impeachable offense.
nmewn, here we prefer not to put such immense powers in the hands of only one man
instead, we put those damn powers in the hands of one or two elected bodies/groups, though we take care to represent as faily as possible the various constituencies and groups, and this then often results in parliaments that have lots of parties but not one that calls all the shots alone (as in this case)
which then results in coalition politics, which are messy affairs, including the very instances where the "pump has to be primed", as the Portuguese President is doing now
my little hint, though, still applies: you dear English-speaking cousins generally don't know much about our systems. this does not prevent you, though, of speaking or writing about them as if you did
a situation to which we are used, I have to admit, but I do like to moan about in this British fashion
wish you an excellent day, as far as I know you, you have to go soon
"instead, we put those damn powers in the hands of one or two elected bodies/groups, though we take care to represent as faily as possible the various constituencies and groups, and this then often results in parliaments that have lots of parties but not one that calls all the shots alone "
Yes, many so-called progressives on this side of the pond are calling for PR instead of FPTP (Canada's new Dauphin among them), but, as we have seen, the result is sclerotic, short-lived parliaments that accomplish little besides more 'extend and pretend'. And, with respect to my American friends, their Constitution envisioned three 'equal but separate' branches of gov't (executive, legislative, judicial), and even within the legislative branch, provided a check on the popular House (elected every 2 years) with the more slowly changing Senate (6 year term, with only 1/3 changeover every two years). Side note: this structure was invented 150 years before the theory of control systems had been invented, and yet is an excellent example of using a slow moving oscillator (Senate) to govern a faster moving oscillator (House) to ensure a more stable outcome.
However, we've seen that both systems, PR and FPTP, fail in the presence of perverse legislators who disobey their own laws (The US Constitution is a beautiful thing; too bad it isn't followed anymore).
I don't pretend to have all the answers, but it seems to me that some form of "direct democracy" (DD) is what we really need, although I'm quite aware of the "it's who counts the votes that counts" problem (e.g. Diebold). Of course, I'd want to tie the right to vote in a DD to literacy, education on the particular issue, and contributions to society. And those details will be the very devil to pin down. (e.g. on matters that DON'T involve spending money, such as "Should people be allowed to testify in court, vote, or drive cars with their faces hidden?" could be open to all, but matters that do involve spending will let everyone have, say, one vote, but you can get additional votes depending on how much tax you paid in prior years, or on how much community service (not ordered, but volunteered!) you've done, or some other activity of accepted merit).
Someone above noted that an educated and involved polis is the sine qua non of a working democracy; we have far too many people in the west content to sit back, collect the dole, and work a few hours in a black market job to earn some extra bucks for dope and booze. I don't advocate exterminating them, as the so-called greens like David Suzuki do, but I don't think people who've opted out of being contributing members should get a say in governance. You want to vote? Earn it!
"wish you an excellent day, as far as I know you, you have to go soon"
Thanks, I did have to go (and a typical Monday...lol) maybe we can hash it out on the weekend ;-)
The Portugese govt have thus designated themselves as the enemy for when the SHT fan for real, and civil war breaks out.
Persons forming Parliament seleced by the people to temporarily act as the agents of the people, for the benefit of the people, on a limited time frame, and all times preserving the system that chooses persons for parliament for a limited time span.
There are no rights inherent in a parliament to suspend the foundational processes that causes its regular creation and programmed destruction, including those who are allowed to participate in being chosen to enter parliament. Such a right would make such a 'Democracy' and the 'Democractic process' a fraud.
The neocon powers in Europe sequentially arranging all the building blocks that will eventually phase shift to wide spread Europeane chaos, beyond anybody's control. Inevitable. we can see the path but cant stop them.
"People, governments and economies of all nations must serve the needs of multinational banks and corporations." Zbigniew Brzezinski
If you think a coalition of people whose sole unifying motive is the desire to steal using government as the agent of the theft can economically heal anything then you are cordially invited to a desert island to test the theory.
Geez.. "bans leftist government" "usurps democracy"
Did you get someone who used to write headlines for CNN or FoxNews?
Obviously there is no democracy in Portugal, no republic. It is a dictatorship, run from Brussels with a local toady governor as "cough, cough" president.
and who put that president where he is? who wrote that Portuguese constitution, and when?
hint: the Portuguese constitution was written way before anything even remotely resembling the EU was even started