Lula’s comeback to victory in Brazil’s 2026 presidential election was no accident. After trailing far-right Flávio, son of imprisoned former president Jair Bolsonaro, by 2 million votes in the first round, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva won the runoff by more than twice that, powered by a movement that deployed mass street mobilizations and a “Lula’s Army” WhatsApp channel to turn the race around in just three weeks.

Now Flávio Bolsonaro has fled to Miami, defying a court order and claiming the vote was stolen. But lawyer and Movimento Brasil Popular organizer Ana Júlia Guedes credits a disciplined campaign that exposed the far right’s criminal ties. And she tells Zoe Alexandra and Rania Khalek the honeymoon will be short: Lula still faces a deeply conservative Congress, rising political violence against Indigenous and Afro-Brazilian communities, and right-wing governors already moving to block his pro-worker agenda.

Guedes explains what’s at stake in Lula’s final term, from social media regulation to a push for mineral sovereignty over Brazil’s lithium and rare earths – and why Brazilians celebrating Bolsonaro’s defeat are already preparing for a tough fight ahead.

Watch full episodes of BT Live, join breakthroughnews.org as a member today!

#breakthroughnews
******
Rough transcript follows:
[Speaker 1:] Part of his escape has to do with the fact that, because he was part of the Congress, part of the Senate, he still is until the end of the year. But because he will lose that, he will lose the privilege of being judged only at the superior and the Supreme Court. When he loses that privilege, he will be judged by a regular court, regular justices. So that will definitely increase the possibilities of him paying for the crimes.

On October 25th, Brazil’s three-time and current president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, surprised the entire world by overcoming an electoral setback in the first round, in which he was defeated by far-right candidate Flávio Bolsonaro, and secured victory in the second round. The legendary union leader during the dictatorship secured 51.79%, equivalent to over 64 million votes, while Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of detained former president Jair Bolsonaro, received 48.21% of the votes, about 59 million.

What’s truly surprising about Bolsonaro’s defeat, because many pollsters had predicted that he would sweep through with this victory having won the first round, is the enormous number of votes that Lula managed to gain during the three weeks between the first and second rounds of voting. Flávio Bolsonaro had won this first round with 48.2% of the votes, more than 56 million votes, and Lula had come in second with 45% of the votes, just 54 million. So there was a significant increase in what he was able to win in the second round.

The key to Lula’s success seemed to lie in his, the PT’s, and the progressive camp’s ability to mobilize millions of people on the streets and on social media in response to Meta’s censorship. Lula supporters hit back with the famous “Lula’s Army,” a WhatsApp channel with over 10 million members, which was in constant mobilization to share, like, and comment on all of the posts for Lula’s campaign. The comeback was of historic proportions, but the struggle is not over yet.

This week, Flávio Bolsonaro left Brazil for Miami of all places and alleges that he is being persecuted and that he rightfully won the elections, though he retracted a declaration that he was the legitimate president of Brazil. If we remember anything from the 2022 Brazilian elections, it’s that the fraud allegations don’t stop with mere statements.

With us to discuss this historic victory, how it happened, and what comes next, we are once again joined by Ana Júlia Gess, lawyer and member of Momento Brasil Popular. Ana Júlia, welcome back to BT Live.

[Speaker 2:] Hi everyone. Hi girls. I’m really, really happy to be here today. This is absolutely, I think in our wildest dreams we couldn’t imagine having such an important victory at this point.

[Speaker 1:] Well, you do seem a lot more calm than last time.

[Speaker 2:] Oh yeah. Oh girl, we were ready to do whatever we needed to do, but oh my god. Yeah, we were ready to do whatever we needed to do, but we knew we had to do a lot. And I think it paid off. Definitely paid off.

[Speaker 1:] And I’m sure there was very little sleep and a lot of being on the streets, being on your phone. First off, we want to talk about this exciting news but just kind of start with the results. So, with what happened on Sunday, what do the results, the voting, which states voted, how many people voted, the abstention rates, what does this tell us about who came out to vote, who perhaps changed their vote, and whose vote was decisive in Lula’s second round victory?

[Speaker 2:] Yeah. So, I mean, just to give quick numbers, we came out of a 2 million votes less. We were behind two million votes to almost five million votes up front. We saw 10 million more people voting for Lula and a very big reduction not only in the number of absences, so we had more people voting, and those who went to vote, we also see them, less people not voting for anyone because in Brazil you can annul your vote at the ballot. So, we saw an increase in participation and that is a result of combining the forces.

We were experiencing exactly what we’ve heard throughout our lives as militants, as activists, that is a combination of the ways of struggle. We were on social media, we were on the streets, we were making discussions about politics like big politics, sovereignty, Brazil’s economy, but also talking about how the access to medication, the access to health, the access to scholarships, how that was also part of what we were deciding.

We saw the two extremes of ages participating. We saw an increase of young folks going to vote and being involved and engaged in all sorts of struggles on social media and on the streets. But we also saw our elderly who have seen dictatorship. We’re talking about people who are even older than Lula, who are 85, 90 years old, those who are 70, 75, who saw and lived through dictatorship coming out of their homes with difficulties. Some of them with disabilities, with mobility difficulties. They all went to vote and they went to vote with a little Lula sticker. Everyone was excited to demonstrate that they had a side.

It’s more than just this electoral victory. What we’re witnessing as people in Brazil right now is something that if you mobilize, if you organize, you can achieve something. And I think that will definitely change the course, the pathways of politics from now on because we’re going to have huge challenges. We’re already seeing the types of violence that we have overcome. We’re definitely changing the ways here and we’re all really glad. Those who have some contact with international media, international news, we’re also really glad to have become some sort of symbol of hope because this is what we talked about when we were on the streets. We talked to people. We said, “No, we’re not only just voting for now. We want to know. We want hope. We don’t want to repeat the same formulas from the past because we’ve seen these white-collar lawyers becoming presidents of Brazil.” And the story was always the same.

We were talking about people like, “Do you recognize this Lula? This Lula, this man is kind of your grandpa.” Many aspects of his life became highlighted, especially becoming a person with a disability due to a work accident. That caught everyone’s attention, this mass of voters’ attention, that we were not just talking about a candidate, we were talking about a country’s project, a sovereignty project. Coincidentally, Flávio escaped to Brazil, he ran away from Brazil on Lula’s birthday, so it became a double meme because here everyone started to make videos saying, “Oh, I proclaim myself the best podcaster, the best mother, the best actress.” It became a meme because this man fled the country with the support of allegedly the Argentinian government of Milei, of course with Trump’s support as well, and it is being investigated at this point that the jet that he flew on is part of a company that is part of a much bigger drug dealing scheme in South America that is once again repeating the trend of these far-rights to be involved with all sorts of organized crime.

He withdrew his declaration of being Brazil’s president, but at that point, people had already checked whether that was written in Brazil or not. He even mistook the Brazilian symbol, like the Brazil symbol for a shield of arms, and they had discovered that he had made that letter on ChatGPT. It’s a done joke, I mean, this guy, but we still have massive challenges at this point. We’ve seen an increase of political violence against local communities, the maroon communities, the indigenous communities, not just being threatened, but being shot, being run over. We saw police officers that ran over motorcycles that were making with Lula’s flag. We’re starting to see companies saying they will lay off all their employees that had supported Lula. We have a regulation that prevents all that. We’re seeing an increase in the reports of this kind of political discrimination. It’s just the beginning of a huge challenge. But somehow the sensation, the feeling that we’re having, the vibes of Brazil that we’re having is that we’re having a people that is much more connected, much with their eyes wide open to understand that it’s not just a victory. This is not just the beginning. This is just the beginning of everything, you know.

[Speaker 1:] Yeah. I mean, indeed it is. So, I want to ask you, all that aside, all the excitement and positivity aside, even though Lula won, he faces an extremely conservative Congress, right? What do you think is going to be the biggest challenge of Lula’s upcoming term? What is it that he’s seeking to accomplish in his final term as president? And then I would add to that, what obstacles do you think he’ll face? What role will the movements in Brazil play in this battle between a conservative Congress and Lula’s presidency?

[Speaker 2:] Well, he has been saying throughout this campaign that these four years were years to rebuild the country, rebuild the Brazilian state, Brazilian government because in reality Bolsonaro had really destroyed the health ministry, all the departments, education, everything was absolutely destroyed, dismantled. Even, for instance, our Brazilian ministry for foreign relations or current foreign affairs ministry. He had been, he’s a man with over 30 years of diplomacy, he had been allocated to the library of the building of foreign affairs. So, people like public servants that had dedicated their entire lives, all that was dismantled and now we would then start to rebuild it.

The Congress is absolutely conservative. The oldest wave of social media and participation and left-wing positioning, everyone like artists, everyone entrepreneurs started to say, “No, I am a left-wing person.” All that started between the first and the second round, but all the congresspeople, governors, state assemblies, all that had already been elected for the first round. So, this is a very conservative spectrum of what conservative can mean. We have women against women’s vote that had been elected as a representative. We have workers against labor rights.

To overcome that, of course, we’ll have to maintain ourselves engaged. I think with what we’re seeing right now, especially with the attacks against indigenous communities, somehow on social media, we’re still very active. So, this is a good rhythm. We’re trying to create muscle to these efforts, but we’ll have to keep on doing the experiencing and doing what we have seen that works. That is this grassroots engagement. This is something that we want to fight against this conservative Congress and we’re seeing more people wanting to be part of movements, wanting to be part of left-wing parties. This will be absolutely important and what we want is to build a really sovereign state project.

We’re talking about social media regulation already. That is an absolute priority for now. We’re talking about transforming many of these public policies into state policies so they can’t be varied throughout each government. We’re talking about the protection of these local and indigenous communities. We’re talking about mineral sovereignty because we just started talking about having a state-owned company that would organize the exploitation and marketing of our minerals, especially rare earths, lithium, and niobium. We have big reserves and we want to use that to make sure that our country will be developed for the people.

We’re already seeing governors, for instance, increasing taxes because here the taxation for fuel is state-defined. We’re already seeing conservative right-wing governors increasing the taxes of fuel to create obstacles for the reduction of food prices that would start. It’s a legal battle, but definitely a mobilization battle. At the same time, we’re seeing governors and mayors that had reduced the bus circulation during Sunday, the voting day, and they are now already suffering some sort of opposition or impeachment processes in the city halls and on the city councils.

It is to combine the presence of those who have got to the congresses and state assemblies and city councils to combine their action with social media presence but also talking to people. It is, I mean, it seems we’re experimenting a methodology that had been told to us by Russian revolutionaries, but here we are well 110 years later saying, well, who would have known if it worked on imperialist Russia, it can work in your country in 2026. But we’re just to give another really horrible fact that we’re seeing. We’ve seen congresspeople, state and federal congresspeople who were elected saying that, oh, we should start painting the stores and any places, the entrepreneurships painted with a red star so they can be identified as left-wing. And they said that, like even the Jewish community went and said, “Well, this is literally fascism.” So, it’s talking about history, talking and we’re seeing even these influencers like makeup, fashion influencers saying, “Hey, you should read Carol P to talk about feminism. You should read Helena that is a Japanese Brazilian feminist.” So, it’s the start of something new but it’s a much broader horizon than what we would have experienced if we had lost these elections.

[Speaker 1:] No, and I think that’s extremely important. I wanted to dig into this point which you’ve brought up a couple of times now, I think, with regards to this agitation and propaganda, this tool that had been very refined in this electoral victory. We’ve seen many reports now coming out over the past several days. Even the New York Times is very interested in this concept of Lula’s army and the WhatsApp channels. So, let’s talk about how this victory happened, how it was achieved. Again, when you were on this program before this second round, you spoke about these massive street mobilizations, the mobilization of people on social media. Let’s first talk about how people were activated and mobilized, what role that played, and what does it tell us about the possibility of defeating the right-wing in Latin America and across the world.

[Speaker 2:] Yeah. So, that was an initiative that one congressman called Jean Wyllys started. He’s been on social media, has been talking about that for quite a while now, but it kind of caught up. Everyone said, “Well, let’s do what we can do.” I think what that created, and I think that’s one of the biggest lessons learned, is that it created a possibility for you that cannot leave your house to go to a demonstration. Or you that is a bit more low profile on social media, everyone could do something to take the campaign a bit further. So, it is to invite one person. You don’t have to make a video, but if you can, you should. But if you can’t make a video, you can upload one of the videos that he would send there.

This was a big lesson learned that it is to create tools in which each person can individually contribute according to their possibilities because not everyone can or feels comfortable to go to a demonstration or even think that a demonstration is important. When the victory happened, I live in São Paulo, we went to Paulista, which is this huge avenue that usually appears on international reports, and the subways were already taken by people. On Saturday, we had a massive demonstration, and we had people from all over the place. I think that also kind of shifted. I think that when everyone saw that they could contribute by sending one text message, by uploading their WhatsApp status or putting on stories or sharing reels, that kind of brought people closer to this whole big purpose.

I think that was a very important element and it’s still happening, of course, not in the rhythm that we were, but we had daily tasks, literally daily tasks. We’re seeing already there is a militancy for the French elections that is coming up. It is a daily task thing, one thing you do, you can share this, you must comment that, you share that on your story, whatever. That created this idea that you were part of something. I think that’s another element that we talk about for a really long time on the left wing. It is how to promote collectivity, how to make people feel part of something. That stimulated and made the demonstrations become bigger and bigger. During that last week, we saw demonstrations here in São Paulo, a huge city, but we also saw in small cities, like cities with 4,000 inhabitants, they would have a demonstration there with 150, 200 people. So, this kind of simulation, this kind of thing already helps, but overall, I think this collectivity idea gave a pathway but also to talk about the future, to talk about hope, to talk about winning. It’s not only just, oh, we’ll overcome him, but we’ll also win.

Another element that was absolutely important, especially considering that we reversed the first round results in very important states, especially Minas Gerais, it is a very defining state. I know in the US you have those states that if you win in these states, you’ll win the elections. Here, it’s the same. We have it with Minas. What we saw is to spread out the information about these right-wing guys. So, Flávio Bolsonaro is just one of them that is involved in all sorts of crime. We started to say here that he saw the criminal code and thought it was a to-do list. I mean, he keeps on committing crimes. We started to talk about that and to talk about that he’s a person that is involved with what’s the worst for our society, that is what is happening in every country at this point. All of these right-wing people, they are involved with some sort of criminal network or drug trafficking or sex trafficking, people trafficking, gun, all that. They are always involved because this is who they are. To talk about that was also very important. We had tasks to talk about Lula, but also to report, to denounce, to say who these people really are.

I think that was, it’s so important that some of these congresspeople and governors and mayors who were involved somehow in trying to prevent people from getting to the ballot locations, they are already escaping as well. They are already fleeing the country. They left the cities. So, this combination of denouncing their crimes, they always have a vast list of crimes, denouncing that we are even joking here. We’re the ones who are the patriots. We’re the ones defending families. We’re the ones defending everything that our country has. This is a very important element too, that it is to give this national content to what we’re saying, the protection of the population. These combination of these messages were also very defining to get the results that we got and to open this horizon from now on because we’re the ones talking about family defense, about defending the country. As you know, this is the commitment we said that we would accomplish. So, here we are accomplishing those. This has been a very important experience in this wave.

[Speaker 1:] Well, lastly, we wanted to ask you about somebody who’s still making some headlines for his outrageous behavior, and that’s Flávio Bolsonaro, who’s now in Miami. He said to media that he is being persecuted, that his father is a political prisoner, and that he plans to return to Brazil, though notably he’s walked back the claim that he’s the legitimate president of Brazil, which he had initially said in a statement. But instead now he’s saying that he’s the leader. What do you think comes next? Is there fear of a struggle over the legitimacy of the elections? Will we see an attempted coup-like situation like in 2022 when these angry Bolsonaro voters attempted to overturn the results? How are social movements preparing for this right-wing response?

[Speaker 2:] This is another lesson that we had learned with our neighboring countries, but once again they’re right. It is for those who attend against the sovereignty of your country. Those must be judged and if needed imprisoned. Those who took part during those that took could attend in 2022. They have responded to criminal lawsuits and they are now either imprisoned or accomplishing their felons just like Jair Bolsonaro. It’s not very new that when the right wing loses an election, they say that it was fraud. They started doing that in 2014 when Dilma was elected in a very tight election as well, but she was elected once again. But again, it’s something that they do because they can’t accept any sort of democracy. Flávio keeps coming up and down. The thing is he is being investigated as being a key member of a very large financial scandal, financial crime against Brazilian and a lot of retirement funds in Brazil, and also being part of other more common illegal networks.

Part of his escape has to do with the fact that because he was part of the Congress, part of the Senate, he still is until the end of the year. But because he will lose that, he will lose the privilege of being judged only at the superior and the Supreme Court. When he loses that privilege, he will be judged by a regular court, regular justices. So that will definitely increase the possibilities of him paying for the crimes because that financial scandal that he was part of also included Marquez even allegedly. We do see the possibility of him literally running away just like his brother that still lives in the US that is being prosecuted here in Brazil for the coup attempts as well.

For the next four years, we do expect some attempts in trying to delegitimize this government, but we’re preparing ourselves. At this point right now, we’re living those known glory days, but we know that we have a very rough path ahead of us. By organizing, by creating all these possibilities to organize, to create all the possibilities for people to give their contribution in the smallest portions that they can. This is a lesson that we learned and that we’ll take on because we know that they will try to attempt against everything that we are, even because this is what they’ve been doing. His party, Flávio’s party, had recognized Lula’s victory, like all the right-wing parties recognized, the electoral court recognized. So here in Brazil, this claim of fraud is pacified. We do not have this claim being sustained here in any legal or even political substance.

But how will they use this narrative to, in the next few years, create a very hostile environment to Lula’s government? This is something that we know will happen. We still don’t know how, but we are going to prepare ourselves. We’ve seen hard days. This is not the first time we’ll see Congress trying to attempt a president, and we will learn from our difficulties. We’ll learn our lessons, but we’ll learn especially because somehow we want to make sure that this democracy is the frontier of democracy and to keep on sending out to the entire world that you can, no matter how big or how small your country is, you must dream and fight for democracy. This is an absolute, this is what we want to be, and this is the message that we want. We want to create a new era for all of those people’s strugglers and people’s fighters around the world because it will be worth it. Oh, the victory is wonderful.

[Speaker 1:] Well, we can feel the great vibes from here. Ana Júlia, thank you so much again for joining us today, explaining exactly how in three weeks this election was turned around. We’ll be sure to check back with you soon. Of course, Lula is inaugurated on January 1st and thus will begin a period of intense struggle on the streets, in Congress, and in all the other realms of society. So, we’ll be sure to bring you back then.

[Speaker 2:] Thank you so much for inviting me.

Lee en español aquí

Brazil’s general election on October 4 delivered a severe warning to the left. Flávio Bolsonaro, the presidential candidate of the Liberal Party (PL), finished ahead of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, with approximately 47% against 45%. Neither secured a majority, sending them into a runoff on October 25. More troubling than this narrow presidential gap was the advance of bolsonarismo through Congress. The election has strengthened a political movement whose ambitions extend beyond defeating Lula to reshaping the institutions that obstruct its exercise of power.

The imprisonment (house arrest) and electoral exclusion of Jair Bolsonaro have not dissolved his movement. His son Flávio carries its presidential banner, while other members of the family have won seats in Congress. Michelle Bolsonaro, Jair’s wife, and Carlos Bolsonaro, his son, enter the Senate; Jair Renan, another son, and Renato, Jair’s brother, enter the Chamber of Deputies. Nepobolsonarismo is an appropriate name for this family’s expansion through the state. Yet the family is only the most visible expression of a broader project, rooted in powerful economic interests and a deeply organized reactionary politics.

A presidential contest with continental stakes

Lula remains the principal obstacle to the return of this project to the presidency. His defeat would affect workers and peasants throughout Brazil, but also the possibilities for regional cooperation and an independent Latin American foreign policy. Brazil’s size, industrial capacity, raw minerals (such as critical minerals), agricultural resources, and diplomatic reach give its political direction continental significance. A government that subordinates these assets to Washington’s priorities would weaken the space available to neighboring countries seeking their own paths of development.

The first-round geography demonstrates both Lula’s strength and his difficulties. He retained a commanding position in the Northeast, while Flávio led across the other four regions. São Paulo’s enormous electorate provided a particularly important advantage to the right. These divisions cannot be explained by an opposition between an enlightened population and an ignorant one. They require an examination of the different conditions of work, the organization of political life, and the capacity of competing movements to interpret people’s frustrations.

Lula approaches the runoff with a substantial social record. Unemployment fell to 5.3% in the quarter ending in August, the lowest rate for that period in the statistical series beginning in 2012. Such improvements matter enormously to families for whom a regular wage brings relief from daily uncertainty. But an improved national indicator does not settle the political argument. Employment can coexist with exhausting journeys, expensive housing, inadequate public services, and the insecurity of debt. The distance between statistical improvement and lived experience remains terrain on which the right operates.

Bolsonarismo, or Brazil’s far right of a special type, translates these frustrations into resentment against the left, all public institutions, and vulnerable sections of society. Its promise of order offers an immediate language for fear, while concealing the economic arrangements that produce insecurity. The left cannot answer this merely by advertising government achievements. It must connect those achievements to a credible program for changing everyday life, and explain which interests prevent further advances. A worker struggling with debt needs more than reassurance that the economy is performing well. This has been the problem for Lula, whose program for the future does not seem to promise more than what has been delivered till now.

The senate: a struggle over institutional power

The Senate election is particularly consequential because 54 of its 81 seats were contested. Senators serve eight-year terms, so the results will shape national politics well beyond the next presidential administration. The PL won 19 seats and will hold 28 in the new Senate, making it the largest party. The PT will have nine. The bolsonaristas have therefore established a formidable position, although the PL itself remains short of a majority and must bargain with other parties.

Michelle Bolsonaro and Bia Kicis took both seats in the Federal District, while Carlos Bolsonaro and Carol de Toni won the two seats in Santa Catarina. These victories show the movement’s ability to organize coordinated campaigns and concentrate support behind its candidates. There were important successes for the left: Rui Costa and Jaques Wagner won in Bahia, Humberto Costa retained representation in Pernambuco, and Marília Campos won in Minas Gerais. These results preserve points of resistance within an increasingly hostile chamber. The Senate’s significance extends beyond ordinary legislation. The bolsonaristas have made their confrontation with the Supreme Federal Court a central political objective, including demands to impeach its ministers. Their strengthened representation increases their capacity to pursue that confrontation and to influence the election of the Senate president. Predictions of an automatic majority for impeachment should be treated cautiously: party affiliation, campaign declarations, and votes in a specific proceeding are different things. Nevertheless, the danger of using legislative power to intimidate the judiciary has plainly grown.

This is part of a struggle over the conditions under which the far right can govern. The judicial proceedings against Jair Bolsonaro did not remove the social forces supporting him. Those forces now seek greater leverage over institutions capable of restraining them. For the left, defending democratic space must therefore accompany the struggle to expand social rights. Workers’ organizations cannot afford to lose the freedoms through which they organize, educate, and confront capital.

Federal deputies: the right advances, the left finds openings

All 513 seats in the Chamber of Deputies were up for election this year. The PL secured 121, consolidating its position as the largest party in this chamber as well as in the Senate. The federation of the Workers’ Party, Communist Party of Brazil, and Green Party won 88 seats, with the PT itself taking 70. The federation’s growth is significant, but it leaves Lula’s allies far from a majority. Parties of the right hold 303 seats, while the broader parliamentary left holds 124.

The outcome strengthens the far right of a special type within a legislature already dominated by conservative interests. It also weakens some established brokers of parliamentary power, such as the centrão, the collection of parties that trades legislative support for influence over appointments and public resources, although it remains indispensable for majority building. What bargaining will take place within the centrão will now take place alongside a larger and more assertive PL. If Lula wins in the second round, he will confront substantial congressional resistance, but if Flávio wins, the same Congress could facilitate a reactionary program.

Yet the election also brought important representatives of a fighting Left into the Chamber. Jones Manoel, the communist historian elected through PSOL in Pernambuco, received 249,077 votes and finished first in Recife. Elias Jabbour, the communist geographer, was elected for the PCdoB in Rio de Janeiro. Their victories suggest an audience for political education and socialist arguments, even amid the right’s advance. They offer resources for rebuilding confidence among people who have grown impatient with the narrowing ambitions of parliamentary politics. Jones Manoel has already offered to assist Lula’s runoff campaign, including its digital communication, while proposing stronger attention to demands such as free public transport. This is a useful example of political clarity: criticism of the government’s limitations can coexist with active mobilization against the far right of a special type. Such unity does not require workers to abandon their demands. It becomes stronger when those demands supply the campaign’s energy and direction.

The task before October 25

The runoff cannot be won through negotiations among party leaders alone. It requires organized activity in workplaces, neighborhoods, universities, and rural communities, with a program people can recognize in their own lives. Transport, wages, housing, debt, public healthcare, and the time consumed by work must become the substance of a democratic campaign. Defense of sovereignty becomes tangible when it is connected to the ability to use Brazil’s wealth for the needs of its people.

The angry tide has advanced, but it has not carried away the millions who still seek another Brazil. The new communist deputies, the surviving mass organizations (especially the landless workers of the MST), and Lula’s enormous electoral base provide foundations for resistance. The immediate task is to defeat Flávio Bolsonaro. The longer task is to build a popular power strong enough to prevent the oligarchy from deciding, election after election, how little change the majority will be allowed.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian and journalist. He is the author of forty books, including Washington Bullets, Red Star Over the Third World, The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World, The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South, and How the International Monetary Fund Suffocates Africa, written with Grieve Chelwa. He is the executive director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research, the chief correspondent for Globetrotter, and the chief editor of LeftWord Books (New Delhi). He also appeared in the films Shadow World (2016) and Two Meetings (2017).

This article was produced by Globetrotter.

With the Brazilian presidential election headed to a runoff, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is down 47% to 45% and faces a massive fight ahead. I wanted to give a quick analysis of what happened and where things are going next. Lula could still win if he can consolidate support from third parties Lula lost […]

The post Brazil on the brink: Why Lula is down against Bolsonaro Jr appeared first on Asia Times.

Tens of thousands of students took to the streets of Chile on Thursday, October 1, to demand that the government of the ultra-conservative José Antonio Kast not cut the education budget. More than 30 civil society organizations joined the call issued by the Chilean Student Confederation (CONFECHA) in support of the “national strike.”

Among the supporters were the United Workers’ Union (CUT), the Chilean Teachers’ Association, the High School Students’ Assembly, the 8M Feminist Coordinating Committee, the National Federation of Education Workers, and the National Association of Kindergartens, among others.

“We see that on September 30, the government presented a new bill to Congress, and the only certainties we have are the precedents set by this government in its first six months – which are cuts: cuts for working families, cuts for students in the areas of health, in education, housing, and social security,” said Laura Mlynarz, spokesperson for CONFECHA and president of the Chilean Student Federation.

She added: “In the face of that, we respond with social unity, we respond with organization, we respond with mobilization – especially in the face of an authoritarian government that refuses to listen to its citizens and refuses to create spaces for dialogue.”

The slogan “Not a single peso less for education” was chanted by thousands of people who filled Alameda Avenue, one of the main streets in the capital, Santiago. Kast, true to his neoliberal orthodoxy, announced budget cuts to Chile’s public education system.

In a presidential address, Kast announced the 2027 Budget Law, which calls for an investment of 17.3 trillion pesos in education – a figure lower than the 17.4 trillion allocated in 2026. While this may not seem like much, when inflation and other factors are taken into account, it may prove more alarming than it appears at first glance.

“These figures are insufficient and, I would say, misleading; they don’t even make up for a year’s loss in purchasing power,” said Mario Aguilar, president of the Chilean Teachers’ Association.

However, according to the president, the measure was taken to safeguard other social services: “We hope you understand that in the budget we have done everything possible to uphold social rights and that the issues of pensions and free education are covered. But when you protest, you also have to respect those who think differently.”

Kast is referring to the clashes between the police (Carabineros) and students that, according to some reports, resulted in at least 31 arrests.

But the student movement rejects Kast’s statements, which clearly place the blame for the clashes on the students. Laura Mlynarz said the government is seeking to silence the students through repression.

“This government criminalizes the student movement, and we are the ones who are most concerned about moving toward an equitable Chile – toward fair, dignified, and solidarity-based development,” said Mlynarz. Regarding Education Minister Aria Paz Arzola, she said: “The minister doesn’t want to listen to us; the minister doesn’t want to meet with us; and the precarious state of public education just keeps getting worse.”

The first incidents of violent repression were reported just a few minutes after the rally began. The police fired tear gas canisters, while students with their faces covered threw the tear gas canisters back and hurled other objects. The police also used water cannons, a move described as “brutal repression” by some media outlets.

Clashes were also reported between the protesting students and groups of right-wing students from private universities who, in support of Kast’s far-right government, asserted that “We don’t want a paralyzed Chile; we want a Chile that prospers.”

In this way, the Chilean student movement once again made its presence felt in the South American country and demonstrated that it still retains a significant portion of its capacity to mobilize in the face of attempts to radicalize the neoliberal model, as has happened in past years.

In 2019, tens of thousands of Chilean students launched a full-scale social uprising demanding profound changes in one of the key countries where neoliberalism was institutionalized thanks to the bloody Pinochet dictatorship (1973–1990), which left thousands dead and missing. The protests led to calls for a Constituent Assembly.

For now, Kast has attempted to implement his neoliberal agenda (which includes cuts to education and other social services) cautiously, mindful of the recent past and fearful of a new outbreak of unrest.

Nationwide protests have broken out in India this week seeking the removal of the country’s Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) over allegations of irregularities in the electoral process during various state elections and the deliberate mass disenfranchisement in favor of the ultra-right-wing ruling dispensation.

On Wednesday, September 30, thousands came out on the streets in the southern Indian city of Hyderabad in a joint demonstration called by the Left parties, the regional Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS), and others, to defend voting rights.

On Tuesday, a protest was held in New Delhi led by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) General Secretary M A Baby . The protesters, who were marching to the Election Commission of India (ECI) headquarters, were detained by the security forces for hours in an attempt to disrupt the march.

Similar protests have been held in different parts of the country by various other groups and political formations, including the main opposition party, the Indian National Congress (INC), the civil society groups, student and youth organizations, and the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP).

The CJP, which successfully led a protest by students and youth in the country earlier this year against the union government’s education policies, has called for another national mobilization over the issue beginning on October 2.

The protesters have listed three major demands: 

• halting the so-called Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls
• the re-inclusion of all the voters removed so far from the electoral rolls
• the removal of the CEC Mr. Gyanesh Kumar

Protestors say these demands are essential to protect the fundamental right to vote, currently at risk by the Chief Election Commissioner.

Read more: India’s Cockroach Rebellion and what comes next

Over 130 million removed from the electoral rolls   

India does not have a centralized electoral roll. They are prepared at the local constituency levels. The CEC in the country has been accused of changing this by arbitrarily changing rules and initiating processes. The opposition alleges these actions were taken in order to have control over the electoral outcome. 

According to the data compiled by various reports, over 130 million voters have been deleted from the electoral rolls of different states in India, citing various reasons since the so-called Special Intensive Revision (SIR) began last year. 

Reports indicate that in several state legislative constituencies, the number of voters deleted from the electoral rolls were more than the victory margins during the elections.

Despite its large electoral base, in India’s First Past the Poll system, margins of victory in state legislative constituencies are often very small, ranging from a few to a few thousand votes.

It has also been reported that because of the SIR, in some smaller states between one third to half of all voters have been deleted or put into doubtful lists by the ECI. In bigger states such as Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, millions of people have been excluded. 

In most of these cases, those removed from the electoral list have either already missed their opportunity to vote or expected to miss it given the slow process of appeals for re-inclusion.

For example, in West Bengal, elections were held earlier this year with millions of citizens failing to exercise their right to vote while waiting for the re-inclusion of their names in the electoral list.  

The majority of those who failed to reapply and get their names back into the electoral rolls in time are from economically marginalized sections or from the Muslim-minority communities.

The ECI has also been accused of deliberately suppressing crucial information from the public and delaying the proceedings. 

A deliberate move to benefit the ruling party

The opposition has been accusing that these deletions and the slow process of appeals are deliberate moves adopted by the ECI in complete violation of the country’s legal and constitutional provisions. The process disregards citizens’ fundamental right to vote, the opposition claims.

Opposition parties, civil society groups, and others have been protesting against the process since the beginning while claiming that the process was invented to manipulate the elections in favor of the ruling ultra-right-wing and Hindu supremacist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Civil society groups and some political parties also filed a petition in the country’s Supreme Court last year challenging the SIR. However, the process has continued as the court has repeatedly refused to stay it.

The top court’s refusal to stay the SIR despite acknowledging irregularities and violations in its execution from time to time has enraged the opposition parties and civil society activists.  

The current upsurge was a result of a report published in the Indian Express, one of India’s leading English daily papers on September 23. The report, citing official documents, exposed that the CEC Mr. Kumar bypassed the majority objections and made unilateral decisions related to the SIR on at least 14 occasions.

There are two more commissioners apart from the CEC in the ECI all appointed by the union government. The laws clearly state that all decisions in the ECI must be taken either by a consensus or by a majority.

Mr. Kumar’s unilateral decisions related to the SIR process, including the rules regarding voter enrollment, the deletion or inclusion of names in the electoral rolls, among others, have unfairly benefited the ruling party, including in West Bengal, which amounts to stealing the elections, the opposition alleges.

The BJP came to power in West Bengal, one of India’s largest provinces, for the first time earlier this year amidst allegations of the deliberate exclusion of millions of voters from the electoral rolls.

On Tuesday, the INC issued a statement calling for more protests across the nation and reiterating the demands for Mr. Kumar’s removal, apart from the immediate halt of the SIR and the re-inclusion of all the voters wrongfully deleted from the electoral rolls.

Second freedom struggle

The INC has alleged that the irregularities in the electoral process are nothing less than “a theft of votes and democracy” done by the ECI under the leadership of Mr. Kumar on behalf of the ruling BJP and the movement will not stop until he is removed from his post and tried for his criminal actions.

It also claimed that the movement for the restoration of the right of all adult citizens to vote is no less than a second “freedom struggle,” invoking India’s anti-colonial movement against the British in the early twentieth century.

All the left parties, led by the CPI (M), also issued a joint statement last week seeking the removal of Mr. Kumar, and the withdrawal of the SIR process, claiming the allegations against him raise serious questions regarding the constitutional protection of the right to vote and elect representatives.

The SIR, under Mr. Kumar’s leadership in the ECI, has created doubts about the fairness and integrity of the electoral process in India, the Left parties said, claiming it needs to be urgently corrected.

On the evening of Wednesday, September 30, Bolivian police arrested Attorney General Roger Mariaca and raided the Attorney General’s Office in Sucre and Santa Cruz. The police action comes just days after the US State Department sanctioned and revoked the visas of Mariaca and 21 other Bolivians.

Analysts suggest that the timing of the US sanctions, Mariaca’s arrest, and the raids, are no coincidence, calling it “political pressure” related to a high-profile case.

Mariaca is leading the investigation into Argentine political consultant Fernando Cerimedo. The influential political advisor to Latin America’s far right allegedly influenced elections through social media bot farms, may be involved in drug trafficking, and was accused of ordering an assassination attempt on his ex-partner, Nadia Beller. She was shot three times but survived after undergoing emergency surgery.

Cerimedo has been in custody in Bolivia after attempting to leave the country by plane following the attack on Beller. Messages were found on his cell phone that, according to the prosecution, directly link him to the attempt on her life. Despite the emerging evidence against him, not only in ordering the hit on Beller, but also in crimes of corruption and drug trafficking, Cerimedo seems to have friends in high places, both in the Bolivian president’s office, and in the United States, that may have set the stage for the arrest of his investigator, Attorney General Roger Mariaca.

Read more: Attempted murder accusations, troll farms, and presidential connections: the notorious case of Fernando Cerimedo

Argentine outlet Página 12, reported that, according to Beller, the sanctions against Mariaca were “a move by Donald Trump’s team to protect Cerimedo. As the Washington Post noted this week: ‘Cerimedo is the MAGA (Make America Great Again, Trump’s slogan) man across the entire continent.’”

In the report, Beller is quoted as saying: “Is this decision by the United States part of the fight for the Shield of the Americas or is it about protecting the MAGA network?…If the reason is corruption and drug trafficking, then they need to explain why the visa is being revoked for the attorney general who is investigating a network of that nature. Are they going after the investigator, or are they protecting part of the network?”

As evidence mounts against Cerimedo, the US instead accused his investigator, Mariaca, of allegedly soliciting and accepting bribes to facilitate drug trafficking and helping people involved in violent crimes escape justice.

After news broke of the US actions against him, Roger Mariaca had said he will not back down and will continue the investigations until the end: “[I received the news] with great surprise … I will not back down even one centimeter from the investigations that fall under my jurisdiction.”

He highlighted that while it is clear that the Cerimedo case has generated international intrigue, “no political pressure, whether national or international, can become an impediment to clarifying the facts which must be investigated.”

He was arrested two days later.

Involvement in the drug trade?

In addition to Cerimedo’s well-documented ties to high profile right-wing politicians across Latin America, including in Bolivia, recent revelations from ex-partner Beller, suggest that the powerful political consultant may have also been involved in the drug trade. In a leaked audio message, Cerimedo is allegedly speaking with a woman with whom he is arranging payment so that several flights can operate without excessive pressure from the authorities. Cerimedo mentions a man named Cabrera, whom the Bolivian media suspect is Franz Cabrera, the former head of the Special Force to Fight Against Drug Trafficking (FELCN), who was recently dismissed.

According to the investigations, they allegedly “were paid” for nearly 45 flights, amounting to $700,000, raising significant suspicions about the source of the funds that the political consultant is said to have handled.

The timing of the sanctions against Mariaca and his arrest have raised questions about US interference in the Bolivian justice system. But, as pressure escalates over the investigation into Cerimedo, the case is also revealing a far deeper web of political connection and influence than was initially known, placing it under renewed scrutiny. Wether the investigation is further disrupted or allowed to proceed, what happens next could expose even more about Cerimedo and the network of the Latin American far right.