Argentine President Alberto Fernández and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva met during the 7th Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) Summit held in Argentina in January / credit: Lula da Silva / Twitter
Editor’s Note: The following dispatches are a service of Peoples Dispatch / Globetrotter News Service.
Argentina and Brazil Rejoin UNASUR
The governments of Argentine President Alberto Fernández and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva have officially rejoined the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), a regional integration organization founded in May 2008.
Between 2018 and 2020, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay, under the leadership of conservative heads of state, withdrew from UNASUR due to their alignment with U.S. interests.
In November 2019, following the coup against democratically elected president Evo Morales, the de facto government led by Jeanine Áñez withdrew Bolivia from UNASUR. In November 2020, after the election of President Luis Arce, the country rejoined the regional body.
In August 2021, the government of former Peruvian President Pedro Castillo also announced his country’s reincorporation into the bloc. However, following his ouster and arrest in December 2022, Castillo’s successor Dina Boluarte suspended Peru’s membership.
On April 5, Argentine foreign minister Santiago Cafiero announced the country’s official return to the body after four years of absence. Likewise, on Thursday, April 6, President Lula signed a decree making official Brazil’s return to UNASUR, also after four years.
The measure marked a step in Lula’s drive to reposition the country’s politics after the four years of conservative former president Jair Bolsonaro, who withdrew Brazil from the bloc in April 2019.
Brazil’s decision came a day after the member states of the Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Countries against Inflation (APALCI), including Brazil and Argentina, agreed to join efforts to face the inflation crisis and strengthen regional integration and trade.
On April 5, government officials of 11 Latin American and Caribbean countries took part in a virtual anti-inflation summit to form an alliance to jointly face rising prices / credit: Presidencia Mexico
Latin American and Caribbean Governments Agree to Join Forces Against Inflation
On April 5, the leaders of 11 Latin American and Caribbean countries took part in a virtual summit against inflation called by Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO). The summit sought to form an alliance to jointly face the inflation crisis affecting the region.
In addition to President AMLO of Mexico, the countries represented were Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Honduras, Venezuela, Belize, Colombia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
During the meeting, political leaders discussed joint solutions to face high food prices and shortages in the region, as well as to strengthen regional integration and trade. They expressed their will to unite efforts to guarantee economic growth and development that promote inclusion, equity, and sustainability of food and nutrition security for people, and to face inflationary pressures on the basic food basket and essential goods and services. They also committed to strengthening their economies and productive sectors through inclusion, solidarity, and international cooperation.
In this regard, the leaders signed a joint declaration and agreed on actions to “advance the definition of trade facilities as well as logistical, financial, and other measures that will allow the exchange of basic food basket products and intermediate goods under better conditions, with the priority of lowering the costs of such products for the poorest and most vulnerable population.”
“The emergency exits are always blocked. We have over 100 pallets stacked the whole length of the warehouse—blocking all the fire exits. If there was a fire, we would not all be able to get out,” said Sersie Cobb, Jr., Ryder System worker in South Carolina / credit: Union of Southern Service Workers / Twitter
Eighty-Seven Percent of Service Workers in the U.S. South Were Injured on the Job Last Year
A March survey of 347 service workers in the U.S. South found that a shocking 87 percent were injured on the job in the last year. The workers surveyed came from eleven states across the “Black Belt,” or Southern states with historically large Black populations. Workers organized under the Union of Southern Service Workers filed a landmark civil rights complaint against the South Carolina Occupational Safety and Health Administration (SC OSHA), alleging that the agency “discriminates by disproportionately excluding Black workers from the protection of its programmed inspections.”
The survey, conducted by the Strategic Organizing Center, laid bare the shocking reality of the service industry in the U.S. South, composed of principally Black workers. More than half of survey respondents reported observing serious health and safety hazards at work.
The survey data indicates that workers often fear retaliation to avoid enforcing safety rules themselves, something they shouldn’t have to do in the first place. Service workers need OSHA agencies, whose jobs are to step in to enforce safety regulations.
But in South Carolina, their statewide OSHA plan is not doing its job, workers say. As USSW reports in their complaint, “SC OSHA neglects key industries whose workforce is 42% [Black] employees while focusing the vast majority of its programmed inspections on industries made up of only 18% [Black] workers.”
In conjunction with their complaint, USSW workers went on a one-day strike across three states—Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina—yesterday to fight the dangerous trend of unsafe service industry workplaces.
Part of a drumline at the July 24 protest in front of the Philippine consulate in New York City to counter the new Philippine president’s State of the Union Address / credit: Cygaelle Bergado
NEW YORK CITY–Hours before Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr., gave his first State of the Nation address on July 24, Filipino people throughout the world protested, holding their own “People’s State of the Union Address,” or PSONA.
“The Marcos-Duterte oligarchic symbiosis represents one of the biggest barriers for progress in the Philippines,” Gabriel Rivera told Toward Freedom amid a crowd of about 200 Filipinos who had gathered outside the Philippine consulate in midtown Manhattan, just a few blocks from the United Nations.
As a drumline’s rhythms echoed through the city streets, Filipinos spoke out against Marcos and his vice president, Sara Duterte, both of whom had been elected to office in the island nation on May 9.
Part of a drumline at the July 24 protest in front of the Philippine consulate in New York City to counter the new Philippine president’s State of the Union Address / credit: Cygaelle Bergado
The families of Marcos and Duterte have been accused of violating human rights. That includes during the 1972-81 Martial Law Era under Marcos’ father, Ferdinand Sr., and during former President Rodrigo Duterte’s War on Drugs, which has killed over 6,229 alleged drug users since 2016. Rodrigo is the new vice president’s father.
“Two historically violent dynasties with no regard for human rights or the rule of law have just been seated on the two highest positions in the land,” said Rivera, a member of the Malaya Movement, a progressive Filipino organization advocating for human rights in the Philippines. “I am terrified to even imagine how this could affect generations of Filipinos to come.”
To counter the violence in their homeland, grassroots Filipino organizations from the Northeast Coalition to Advance Genuine Democracy, such as Migrante, GABRIELA, Malaya Movement, Anakbayan and Bayan, assembled for the New York City rally. This rally was one of many held around the world for PSONA, an annual global grassroots event, during which Filipinos report on human-rights violations in their homeland to counter the Philippine president’s annual State of the Nation address that takes place on the same day.
A map of the Philippines, consisting of thousands of islands / credit: Google Maps
The Philippines is a U.S. ally that has waged a war on its own population, killing alleged drug addicts and traffickers. Since 2002, the United States has shipped almost $900 million in arms and has provided more than $1.3 billion in security assistance to the Philippines.
The scene at the July 24 protest held outside the Philippine consulate in New York City / credit: Cygaelle Bergado
In an interview with Toward Freedom, 25-year-old Momo Manalang denounced the disappearance of three Filipino women activists, allegedly abducted by the Filipino government. She demanded their return.
“Our movement is intergenerational, comprised of both martial-law survivors of families of those slain during the War on Drugs, which persists to this day under Bongbong Marcos,” said Manalang, a member of GABRIELA, a mass-based organization focusing on womens’ rights in the Philippines. “It is imperative as a diaspora to register our condemnation and call for the accountability of both regimes for their crimes against humanity.”
A.J. Santos, a migrant from the Philippines, recounted to Toward Freedom how these administrations have directly affected his family.
“My mom fought Ferdinand Marcos, Sr., during Martial Law and was even hunted by the military while her friends and comrades were tortured and killed,” said Santos, 38, of Migrante, a grassroots organization consisting of migrant Filipinos. “And Duterte, he killed five of my friends with his so-called ‘War on Drugs.’”
Protesters lined up July 24 behind Shirley Atienza of Filipino grassroots migrant group Migrante as she read aloud the demands to the Philippine government of the Northeast Coalition to Advance Genuine Democracy / credit: Cygaelle Bergado
Shirley Atienza, a New York-based Filipino migrant and Migrante member, read aloud the nine points of the “People’s Agenda for Change,” while protesters standing behind her held signs outlining each. In bold black paint, they read:
Regulate prices
Revive local agriculture
Enact land reform and national industrialization
Defend and promote human rights
Defend freedom of press + speech
Institute a democratic, ethical and accountable government
Provide free health care and basic social services
Uphold national sovereignty and independent foreign policy
Ensure country’s natural wealth and resources
A Filipino protester at the Philippine consulate in New York City wears an effigy to call out human-rights violations in the Philippines / credit: Cygaelle Bergado
A protester had adorned cardboard signs to their body in an effigy that listed human-rights violations committed in the Philippines. Painted to look like flames, the signs read:
“Extreme inflation & economic crisis,”
“2.9 million unemployed,”
“Forced migration/separated families,” and
“Selling out to foreign interests.
The flames were surrounded by cardboard replicas of gas cans that read, “Corrupt family dynasties own all the land, make all the laws,” “US tax $$ funds Philippine Drug War,” and “Historical revisionism & fake news.”
At the top of the protester’s head sat a gas can that read “Marcos.” Draped around their back was the Filipino flag. As participants gathered to smash the gas cans, the crowd recited, “Makibaka! Huwog matakot!” (Struggle! Do not be afraid!) and other revolutionary Filipino chants, cheering for the downfall of Marcos and Duterte.
Being oceans away from their home country doesn’t stop these Filipino revolutionaries from fighting. At least not Theo Aguila, a 25-year-old organizer from Anakbayan, a mass organization consisting of Filipino youth and students.
“It is through action both here and [in] the Philippines that we may enact change for our motherland.”
Cygaelle Bergado is the Summer 2022 Claudia Jones Editorial Intern for Toward Freedom. She can be followed on Twitter at @cy_bergado.
Atlantans attend a vigil memorializing slain activist Manuel “Tortuguita” or “Tort” Terán on Wednesday, January 18 / credit: Party for Socialism and Liberation-Atlanta
Editor’s Note: Light editing conformed this Peoples Dispatch article to TF’s style.
On June 7, 2021, then Atlanta city councilwoman Joyce Sheperd introduced a city ordinance to lease 381 acres of public land to the Atlanta Police Foundation for a police training facility, then budgeted at $80.6 million dollars. “To her surprise,” writes the activist group Defend the Atlanta Forest, this ordinance was met with massive public opposition.
Leading up to a meeting on June 16, 2021 of Atlanta city council’s finance executive committee, Atlanta residents called in 3 hours and 41 minutes of public comments in the form of pre-recorded messages. Most comments were in opposition to the project. Protesters showed up at Shepherd’s house during the meeting itself, chanting “No Cop City! Keep Atlanta green!” The construction of the training facility would cut down part of Atlanta’s South River Forest, which provides environmental protection against flooding and extreme heat. Shepherd quickly arranged to have police cars stationed outside of her home in response to the peaceful protest.
On September 6, 2021, Atlanta residents called in over 17 hours worth of public comment regarding the new training facility ordinance—of the 1,166 comments called in, 70 percent of them were opposed to the project. The Atlanta City Council ignored the overwhelming opposition and voted 10-4 in favor of building what activists have dubbed “Cop City.”
Cop City, if built, will contain a mock city of Atlanta, where police will practice urban warfare tactics. The facility will also include a Black Hawk helicopter landing pad, explosive testing areas, firing range, and an emergency vehicle driving course. The price tag on the project has since ballooned to $90 million dollars—$60 million to be raised by the Atlanta Police Foundation and $30 million coming from the pockets of Atlanta residents.
Atlanta has one of the largest Black populations out of U.S. cities, with almost half of Atlanta residents being African American. 18.5 percent of Atlantans live in poverty, a rate which is higher than that national average of 11.6 percent. “Operation Shield”, another Atlanta Police Foundation project launched in 2007, developed a network of 11,000 cameras and license plate readers, rendering Atlanta the most surveilled city in the country.
Defend the Atlanta Forest, a group which has emerged as a leader of the opposition to Cop City, writes, “At over 300 acres, Cop City will be the largest police training facility in the United States and is slated to include a mock city where police will train with firearms, tear gas, helicopters, and explosive devices to repress protest and mass unrest, much as they did during the 2020 George Floyd protests. Cop City will hyper-militarize law enforcement, equipping police with a site to train for the suppression of Atlanta’s diverse Black and working-class communities.”
I'm not sure people know just how bad the "cop city" project in Atlanta would be. They want a whole mock city to practice police repression. pic.twitter.com/dWTPtO7VIb
— Read Jackson Rising by @CooperationJXN (@JoshuaPHilll) January 21, 2023
Who’s Backing Cop City?
The anti-police brutality protests following the murder of George Floyd in 2020 caused a cultural shockwave, forcing the hand of even the most powerful corporations. Companies released statement after statement condemning police violence and racism. Some of those same corporations have become the most significant backers of Cop City.
Six days after the death of Floyd, shipping and retail giant Amazon tweeted, “The inequitable and brutal treatment of Black people in our country must stop.” Private logistics company UPS pledged millions of dollars towards racial justice organizations and historically Black universities following the killings of Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor. In 2020, Wells Fargo bank claimed that it had paused donations to police foundations.
All of these major corporations have become a part of the corporate network now backing Cop City. Other companies in this network include, but are not limited to, Inspire Brands (which includes Arby’s, Buffalo Wild Wings, Dunkin Donuts, and others), Waffle House, Chick-fil-a, JPMorgan Chase, and Home Depot. Many top executives at these companies have existing or former ties to police organizations across the country, including the Atlanta Police Foundation.
Activist Dies Fighting Cop City
Many resisting the construction of Cop City have labeled themselves “forest defenders,” in regards to the hundreds of acres of forest set to be destroyed through the building of the police training facility. One such forest defender, Tortuguita, was killed on January 18 during SWAT operations to clear up a protest camp in the Weelaunee Forest, which activists have been occupying for over a year to resist Cop City construction.
Georgia State Patrol (GSP) troopers claim that 26-year-old Tortuguita refused to exit their tent and shot at officers, injuring one. Police then responded by shooting and killing the activist. However, activists are demanding an investigation into the murder, as GSP claims there is no body camera footage and Tortuguita was not known to own or carry a gun.
Tortuguita’s death is not an outlier, and is in fact part of a pattern of criminalization of protest in Atlanta: “forest defenders” have been beaten, pepper sprayed, violently arrested, or otherwise attacked by police since June 2021.
There have been several protest actions following Tortuguita’s murder, including an explosive protest on Saturday, January 21, which right-wing officials slammed as “terrorism” due to incidents of property destruction. Infamous Georgia representative Marjorie Taylor Green published a string of tweets demanding that “BLM” and “Antifa” protesters be labeled as “domestic terrorists.”
In 2021, I called for BLM and Antifa to be declared domestic terrorist organizations.
Tonight, with the violence and rioting in Atlanta, I’m renewing that call.
We must treat these thugs just like we treat any other group using political violence to intimidate their enemies. https://t.co/sqPHQeIDbj
One of the accusations hurled at protesters by authorities is an old one: That those demonstrating are in fact not from Atlanta or are not part of the communities most affected by policing. This “outside agitator” conspiracy is identical to accusations against 2020 anti-police brutality protesters: That those opposed to police violence are not genuinely oppressed or working class, instead, they were wealthy white people looking to stir up trouble.
In response, Atlanta activists have dug up an interesting piece of information about Cop City: Almost half—43 percent—of trainees at the facility would be recruited from out of state. A massive influx of police from across the country would convene in Atlanta to learn the latest tactics in police repression. These police trainees are the true “outside agitators,” activists say, and also a reason why anyone in the United States, not only those from Atlanta, has a vested interest in fighting the construction of Cop City.
the majority of trainees at #copcity would come from outside atlanta. the offense is translocal & so our resistance must be. pic.twitter.com/6xJSUg1kQr
— cop city will never be built (@MariahforAthens) January 24, 2023
Sônia Guajajara (third from left), an Indigenous-rights campaigner and federal deputy candidate who supports the presidential campaign of the Workers’ Party’s Luiz Inácio “Lula” Da Silva. Here, she appears with other feminist campaigners at a left-wing rally in São Paolo the day after Socialist and Liberty Party (PSOL) candidate for the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies Guilherme Boulos and PSOL candidate for São Paolo state deputy Ediane Maria were threatened with a gun by a Bolsonaro supporter earlier this month / credit: Richard Matoušek
SÃO PAOLO, Brazil—Brazilians head to the polls October 2 to vote in the first round of what is considered the most consequential presidential election since the end of almost 20 years of U.S.-backed military dictatorships.
“The fundamental choice,” stated an open letter by several Latin American figures, including ousted Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, “isn’t between [the two presidential hopefuls, President] Jair Bolsonaro and Luiz Inácio ‘Lula’ da Silva, but between fascism and democracy.”
With Brazil being the fifth-largest country by area, along with having the seventh-largest population and economy, the outcome of this election could not only significantly alter the lives of Brazilians, but impact regional politics that have recently swung left as well as the health of the planet.
And it’s not just the outcome that matters.
“Bolsonaro [trailing in the polls] has questioned democracy and camouflaged himself as the great victim of the lack of democracy,” said Danny Shaw, Latin American and Caribbean Studies Professor at the City University of New York, explained to Toward Freedom. “He has preemptively attacked the integrity of the entire voting process.”
Bolsonaro has repeatedly said he would only accept election results if they were “clean,” but that he doubted they would be. Through livestreams, he has spoken to followers about resisting a loss and helping stage a coup. A poll showed high support for a coup among members of the Brazilian Navy and the Air Force, while enthusiasm remained low in the larger army. “But, it doesn’t seem like he has institutional support from within the military to make these things into a reality,” according to Shaw.
“It’s kind of unimaginable,” said Socialist and Liberty Party (PSOL) São Paulo state deputy candidate Ediane Maria, “to see Bolsonaro passing the [presidential] sash to Lula.”
This reporter reached out to Lula’s Workers’ Party and Bolsonaro’s Liberal Party for comment, but they did not reply by publication time.
Brazil’s recent history includes a 2016 procedural coup against Rousseff in favor of her business-friendly vice president, Michel Temer. Lula himself was incarcerated in 2018, which a court has since found to have been unlawful, as well as a separate ruling that banned him from competing in the 2018 election that Bolsonaro won.
In this period, Brazil ranked as one of the 10 largest democratic backslides, according to the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute based at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden.
Former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” Da Silva (left) and current Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro (right) are the main contenders in Brazil’s first-round presidential election being held on October 2 / credit: Ricardo Stuckert (left) / Alan Santos / PR (right)
Testing Democracy
If the necessary conditions for fascism are nativism, belief in a social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation, and anti-democratism, Shaw said Bolsonaro meets the criteria of a fascist. Bolsonaro’s government has the “underpinnings and trappings of fascist rule,” Shaw explained. “The unofficial religion of Bolsonarismo is anti-socialism and anti-communism.”
Bolsonaro pressured the electoral commission to allow the military to also count votes, and that has succeeded, according to newspaper Folha de São Paulo.
The PSOL and Folha de São Paulo assert Bolsonaro created a parallel $1 billion budget to buy support in Congress to prevent an impeachment and to fund his campaign.
Bolsonaro has glorified Brazil’s brutal military dictatorships and has conveyed himself to be like Benito Mussolini, including with black-clad motorcycle rallies.
He demanded leftists be “eradicated from public life” hours after a Bolsonaro-supporting farmer murdered his Lula-favoring colleague with an ax. He also called for Workers’ Party supporters to be “machine-gunned.”
This month, an assailant reportedly announced “I am Bolsonaro” while pointing a gun at Maria and her fellow PSOL candidate for the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies, Guilherme Boulos.
“It was an attack on our democracy, on our freedom of expression,” Maria told Toward Freedom. “You see horror scenes of people who are killed at work, or in the streets just for defending what they believe in. This year, people sense the violence, the fights. We have a president who says, ‘shoot them in the head,’ that encourages and defends mass gun ownership. Thank God it’s coming to an end… this moment of horror that we lived through, this process of violence against our bodies.”
Filipe Campante, professor at Johns Hopkins University, raised it is unclear whose responsibility it would be to evict Bolsonaro from the presidential palace if he opted to stay. No one is certain how such a scenario would play out, and in the disorder, the perceived legitimacy of the handover of power could be damaged. Even if Bolsonaro does give way to Lula, Campante and others have raised important questions about the strength and preparedness of Brazil’s democratic institutions. All key parties have met regularly with the military, which has played its cards close to its chest. As Campante said, this culture of keeping the military close is a sign of a “democracy that’s not healthy.”
A poll last week found 40 percent of Brazilians expect a high chance of violence on Election Day, and 9 percent might avoid voting (at risk of penalties) because of fear.
“If Brazilian [progressives] can [win] given the political climate they’re facing,” explained U.S.-based human-rights and labor-rights lawyer Dan Kovalik to Toward Freedom, “then everyone should be able to do it.” He added it would be an inspiring victory for movements as far away as Europe.
A left-wing rally in front of in São Paulo’s Museum of Modern Art the day after Socialist and Liberty Party (PSOL) candidate for the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies Guilherme Boulos and PSOL candidate for São Paolo state deputy Ediane Maria were threatened with a gun by a Bolsonaro supporter earlier this month / credit: Richard Matoušek
The Global Implications of a Lula Victory
So far, the Brazilian left has been relatively united in helping Lula win. Maria’s left-wing PSOL, for instance, hasn’t presented a presidential candidate. The Latin American leaders’ letter mentioned earlier was addressed to Ciro Gomes, a centrist candidate polling around 7 percent. The letter asked him to pull out to avoid a Bolsonaro win.
“The Pink Tide seems to be back,” Kovalik said about the recent wave of progressive victories across Latin America. “But I think Brazil needs to be a part of that because other countries—Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua—are under great attack, especially economically, by the United States. To have Brazil’s support again would be huge, both their political and economic support. It’d definitely leaven the movement.”
A red Brazil is likely to not rely on special relationships with strongmen, as Bolsonaro did with former Italian Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, former U.S. President Donald Trump and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A Lula victory, added Kovalik, “would help bring about the multipolar world that we need.”
However, as foreign policy did not form a large part of the electoral campaign, and the global dynamics are different compared to when Lula was last in power in 2010, it is difficult to predict the exact foreign implications of a Lula victory. Lula invited Palestine to the 2010 BRICS summit in Brasilia, Brazil’s capital. (BRICS is an acronym that stands for an alliance between the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.) But he also sent Brazilian troops for UN peacekeeping in Haiti, where they abused their power and stayed for years after being asked to leave.
“I think we can expect a more anti-imperialist Lula,” Shaw posited. “Even a neutral Lula would neutralize imperialism” by building a stronger relationship with Caracas and other anti-imperialist governments.
The Brazilian Communist Party bloc at a left-wing rally the day after Socialist and Liberty Party (PSOL) candidate for the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies Guilherme Boulos and PSOL candidate for São Paolo state deputy Ediane Maria were threatened with a gun by a Bolsonaro supporter earlier this month / credit: Richard Matoušek
Challenges a Third Lula Term Would Face
However, a commodities boom had buoyed the original Pink Tide that had started in the 1990s and ended in the 2000s. Moreover, Bolsonaro, as Kovalik has said, has “dismantled social programs.” This raises questions about the surmountability of the challenges faced by a new government.
Lula’s last government “broke the cycles,” as Maria put it, “to break barriers, to put the bricklayer’s son and the housecleaner’s daughter into university.”
But Bruno Clima, an architect in the housing-justice group Central Homeless Movement (MSTC) in São Paulo, is worried about current challenges. “Even with the victory of a capable president, lifting the country up will not be easy or quick.”
With limited resources and enormous crises, Lula might struggle to meet such expectations in one term. Some are worried enough Brazilians would lose patience with him after that, and this turn to progressivism could be a bump in a larger turn towards neoliberalism.
For now, Maria sees the upcoming election as a battle between democracy and fascism.
“Our country is hoping that love can win over hate and that we are going to elect Lula in the first round, and elect him well,” Maria said. “We will fight for democracy in Brazil, which has never in my lifetime been as threatened as it is now.”
Richard Matoušek is a journalist who covers sociopolitical issues in southern Europe and Latin America. He can be followed on Twitter at @RichMatousek and on Instagram at @richmatico.
(@RepMTG) 
