When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
CLARIN

Brazilian Lessons For Argentina's Broken Politics

Brazil's future looks bright regardless of who wins the presidential runoff. Why? Because its parties matter more than personalities, argues Argentina's former ambassador in Brazil.

Argentine President Cristina Kirchner greets Brazil's Dilma Rousseff in April 2013
Argentine President Cristina Kirchner greets Brazil's Dilma Rousseff in April 2013
Diego Guelar*

-OpEd-

BUENOS AIRES — The military regime that controlled Brazil for nearly two decades, beginning in 1964, "liberated" the country's political system in stages, starting at the muncipal level and eventually influencing the presidency.

Upon its return to democracy, Brazil had approximately 600 political parties and a system of mutating alliances wherein hundreds of candidates "circulated" among coalitions, shifting from one implausible grouping to another.

Since then, two parties have attained leading positions in the political spectrum: the Social Democrats (PSDB), which held sway under twice-elected President Fernando H. Cardoso (1995-2002); and the Workers Party (PT), which came to power under President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010) and continues to govern under President Dilma Rousseff.

The PSDB and PT, in turn, have relied on the support of two other parties — the center-right DEM (Democrats) and center-left PMDB (Social Democrats) — that may not aspire to the presidency but assure governability and wield power on the municipal, state and parliamentary levels.

To this "mainstream center" we can add 24 parties with parliamentary representation that are permanently or occasionally allied to the PT or PSDB. In the recent general election, the PT led a coalition of nine parties. The PSDB's coalition included 15 parties.

We should recall that Brazil has 142 million eligible voters across 27 federal states, with a territory three times the size of the European Union.

The PT, the most voted party, won 70 seats in the lower house of Congress. Its allies won an additional 223 seats (out of 513 in total), meaning that together they enjoy a 57% majority. The PT won in 11 of the country's 27 states (first round) and retained its majority in the upper house of Congress as well.

This extremely complex political system has had the virtue of terminating messianic populism and consolidating a "front-oriented" system that requires Brazil's leaders to demonstrate an enormous capacity for dialogue and negotiation.

The Brazilian presidency will be decided in an Oct. 26 runoff between Rousseff (PT), the incumbent, and Aécio Neves (PSDB). In the first round of the elections, the two candidates won 41.5% and 33.6% of the vote respetively. A third contender, Marina Silva, was knocked out after winning 21.5% of the vote despite her recently rising popularity.

Silva will back Aécio on the basis of existing agreements to fight corruption and inflation, end reelection for presidents, simplify taxes and eliminate subsidies to large firms. The third-place finisher would also like to see an independent Central Bank and wants education and healthcare to each have 10% of the budget.

The result of the runoff is anything but a foregone conclusion. But whoever wins, Brazil will continue to grow — and with a low inflation rate, social inclusion and a high rate of investment.

There is a lesson to be learned here in Argentina. The party system works. Without it, all a country has is personality-driven leadership that is inevitably transitory and destined to fail.

*Diego Guelar served as Argentina's ambassador to Brazil, the United States and the European Union. He currently heads foregin policy for the PRO party.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Green

Forest Networks? Revisiting The Science Of Trees And Funghi "Reaching Out"

A compelling story about how forest fungal networks communicate has garnered much public interest. Is any of it true?

Thomas Brail films the roots of a cut tree with his smartphone.

Arborist and conservationist Thomas Brail at a clearcutting near his hometown of Mazamet in the Tarn, France.

Melanie Jones, Jason Hoeksema, & Justine Karst

Over the past few years, a fascinating narrative about forests and fungi has captured the public imagination. It holds that the roots of neighboring trees can be connected by fungal filaments, forming massive underground networks that can span entire forests — a so-called wood-wide web. Through this web, the story goes, trees share carbon, water, and other nutrients, and even send chemical warnings of dangers such as insect attacks. The narrative — recounted in books, podcasts, TV series, documentaries, and news articles — has prompted some experts to rethink not only forest management but the relationships between self-interest and altruism in human society.

But is any of it true?

The three of us have studied forest fungi for our whole careers, and even we were surprised by some of the more extraordinary claims surfacing in the media about the wood-wide web. Thinking we had missed something, we thoroughly reviewed 26 field studies, including several of our own, that looked at the role fungal networks play in resource transfer in forests. What we found shows how easily confirmation bias, unchecked claims, and credulous news reporting can, over time, distort research findings beyond recognition. It should serve as a cautionary tale for scientists and journalists alike.

First, let’s be clear: Fungi do grow inside and on tree roots, forming a symbiosis called a mycorrhiza, or fungus-root. Mycorrhizae are essential for the normal growth of trees. Among other things, the fungi can take up from the soil, and transfer to the tree, nutrients that roots could not otherwise access. In return, fungi receive from the roots sugars they need to grow.

As fungal filaments spread out through forest soil, they will often, at least temporarily, physically connect the roots of two neighboring trees. The resulting system of interconnected tree roots is called a common mycorrhizal network, or CMN.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

You've reach your limit of free articles.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime.

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Ad-free experience NEW

Exclusive international news coverage

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Monthly Access

30-day free trial, then $2.90 per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch

The latest