By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Notable figures, including former President Cavaco Silva and former Deputy Prime Minister Paulo Portas, alongside thousands of electors, have publicly supported Seguro. This backing arises in response to André Ventura’s significant electoral success, which underscores the rapid growth of Chega, an ultranationalist party that has become the leading opposition. Ventura’s campaign, targeting minority groups and criticizing corruption, has positioned Chega as a significant force, prompting concerns from former politicians and consultants who emphasize the need to distinguish between liberal and illiberal political ideologies and defend democratic values. Prime Minister Luís Montenegro faces pressure as prominent conservatives rally behind Seguro, while he declines to endorse either candidate in the upcoming presidential runoff.
Read the original article here
It’s quite remarkable to witness a political maneuver where conservatives in Portugal have opted to back a left-wing candidate, a seemingly counter-intuitive move, all to prevent a far-right president from taking office. This scenario paints a fascinating picture of political pragmatism in action, a quality that appears to be in short supply elsewhere, particularly when one glances across the Atlantic to the United States. The contrast is stark; in the US, it feels as though political ideologies have become so entrenched that compromise, even for the sake of democratic stability, is nearly impossible. The idea of American conservatives choosing a candidate who might not align with their every tenet, simply to avoid a perceived greater threat, seems almost alien.
This Portuguese decision might stem from a deep-seated historical awareness, perhaps a collective memory of living under authoritarian regimes. This experience could foster a greater appreciation for the fragility of democracy and the importance of safeguarding it, even at the cost of ideological purity. The narrative here suggests a level of integrity among these Portuguese conservatives that is, regrettably, not often observed in their American counterparts. It’s as if the very fabric of democracy is at stake, and conventional party loyalties are being set aside for a larger, more pressing concern.
The current political landscape in Portugal finds the conservative government in a precarious position. They are a minority government, and their only established partner in parliament is Chega, the far-right party. This dependency creates a complex web of alliances and potential betrayals. By aligning with a left-wing candidate, the conservatives are effectively alienating their only parliamentary ally, Chega. This move is bound to invite significant backlash and risks Chega withdrawing their support entirely, which could cripple the government’s ability to pass any legislation, including crucial reforms they are eager to implement, like a new labor reform package that wasn’t even part of their original election platform.
The situation the Portuguese conservatives find themselves in is largely self-inflicted. They initially took a firm stance, refusing to negotiate with Chega. However, upon realizing the significant presence of a right-wing majority in parliament, they seemingly abandoned their principles in a bid for power. This echo of past political maneuvering is not unique; a similar scenario unfolded in Romania’s 2000 presidential election. In that instance, all major parties rallied behind the socialist candidate, Ion Iliescu, to prevent the rise of a far-right ultranationalist. While Iliescu’s tenure wasn’t without its controversies, the outcome was still preferable to the alternative, highlighting a recurring theme of choosing the lesser of two evils when faced with extremist threats.
The parallels drawn between these political scenarios and the current global political climate are striking. The rise of figures like Donald Trump has, in many ways, provided the world with a clear, albeit alarming, demonstration of what can happen when individuals with questionable democratic credentials gain power. Portugal’s current actions suggest a keen awareness of these risks and a proactive approach to preventing a similar “shitshow” from unfolding on their shores. It’s a stark contrast to the political inertia seen in some other democracies, where the normalization of extreme rhetoric and actions appears to be a growing concern.
There’s a palpable sense of hope and admiration for Portugal’s seemingly intelligent and decisive action. The idea of political groups, even ideological adversaries, coming together to form a united front against a common threat is presented as an ideal for how democracies should function. This sentiment is amplified by the desire to protect Portugal, perceived as a beautiful and peaceful haven, from the kind of divisive political movements that are increasingly impacting other nations. The involvement of figures like Steve Bannon, often associated with far-right movements, adds a layer of concern that the Portuguese are actively trying to fend off.
The news of this conservative backing for a left-wing candidate has indeed caused surprise, even among those within Portugal. It seems the far-right candidate was polling stronger than anticipated, forcing a difficult choice: maintain party loyalty or actively prevent a potentially damaging outcome. This willingness of conservatives to team up with leftists to achieve this goal is viewed as a significant demonstration of prioritizing the nation’s well-being over strict ideological adherence, a concept that appears to be missing in many other political arenas.
This situation starkly highlights the difference between principled individuals and those within political parties who prioritize their careers and party lines above all else. While many Republicans in the US may have privately disagreed with Trump, the vast majority of elected officials fell in line or chose to step away from politics entirely rather than actively oppose him. Portugal’s conservatives, in this instance, appear to be embodying a more courageous and principled stance, a testament to their commitment to democratic values.
The rise of the far-right in Portugal, reportedly fueled by younger generations of Portuguese citizens returning from abroad and bringing with them ideologies akin to the MAGA movement, makes this conservative decision even more significant. It suggests a savviness within the Portuguese population, an ability to recognize and resist the insidious tactics of political actors who create problems only to offer themselves as the solution. This thoughtful compromise is seen as a valuable lesson for other liberal democracies grappling with similar challenges.
The sentiment of “country before party” is strongly embodied in this Portuguese action. It’s a demonstration of a smart government, a government that understands the historical lessons of Europe, where the consequences of allowing far-right extremism to flourish have been devastating. By taking the “higher ground,” Portugal is setting an example for other nations facing similar ideological battles, reinforcing the importance of safeguarding democracy.
This scenario is not entirely unique, with similar patterns observed in Germany, the UK, and France, where center-right and left parties have formed alliances solely to counter the far-right. While these alliances may lack shared values beyond this specific objective, the core idea is to prevent the radicalization that can occur when large segments of the population feel ignored or disenfranchised by the mainstream political establishment. Acknowledging and addressing the concerns of these voters, rather than simply dismissing them, is crucial.
The underlying political dynamics in Portugal are complex, and some argue that the “center-right” parties there have, for a long time, operated more like socialists, with a prolonged period of socialist governance. This might explain why, when an external candidate threatens the established order, even perceived adversaries find common ground. The notion of “conservatives” in Portugal seems to represent a broader spectrum than in the US, where the lines between conservative and far-right can become blurred.
The resurgence of anti-democratic, far-right candidates globally is a clear and present danger. Conventional conservatives who value democracy are recognizing the need to nip this extremism in the bud, drawing on historical memories of authoritarianism, such as Portugal’s PIDE (International and State Defense Police). The preference for a candidate, even one with flaws, over a far-right populist who might champion authoritarian figures from the past, underscores the gravity of the situation.
This act of coalition-building is a normal function of multi-party democracies. While the consumption of Portuguese pastries like pastel de nata is undoubtedly a delightful experience, it’s the political pragmatism that truly stands out. The assertion that the far-right candidate had no real chance of winning might be debatable, given their strong performance in the first round, but the underlying motivation to prevent potentially harmful rhetoric, like calls for dictatorships, is clear.
The impact of figures like Donald Trump is widely felt, serving as a cautionary tale for nations worldwide. Europe, in particular, has a profound understanding of the sacrifices made to achieve and maintain democracy, making them acutely aware of the dangers of far-right resurgence. The European People’s Party (EPP) often engages in similar alliances, prioritizing governmental stability and democratic principles over strict party dogma.
It’s important to distinguish between “conservatives” as a political leaning and a specific party. In Portugal’s case, it appears to be a broader group of individuals who are “conservative-leaning” rather than adherents to a specific “conservative party.” This nuanced understanding aligns more with the idea of some Republicans supporting a candidate like Biden in the US, indicating a shared concern for democratic norms rather than a wholesale ideological shift.
The observation that both major parties in the US are essentially right-wing, with only a difference in degree, is a recurring critique. The contrast with Portugal suggests a more robust multi-party system where distinct ideological lines can be drawn, and where the spectrum of political options is broader. The idea that even a figure like Jesus Christ might be met with hostility by the far-right speaks to the extreme nature of some ideologies.
The comparison of Portuguese conservatism to US Democrats highlights a fundamental difference in political priorities. While US conservatives are often perceived as being driven by personal enrichment and a system that fosters corruption through lobbying and “gentlemen’s agreements,” Portuguese conservatives, in this instance, seem to be motivated by a more altruistic concern for democratic integrity. The US system, where a lack of honor and integrity can be lucrative, particularly in the Trump era, stands in stark contrast to a situation where political leaders are willing to make difficult choices for the greater good.
The irony of the situation in Portugal, where both the socialist party (which is seen by some as no longer truly left-wing) and the conservative party have inadvertently contributed to the weakening of moderate political forces, is noteworthy. This dynamic has led to a political discourse largely centered on “vote for me or the extreme will win,” rather than substantive policy discussions, while also stifling minor parties. The German president’s response to a critique regarding Germany’s “far-right heritage” by emphasizing the importance of allowing moderate parties to exist, rather than fostering a polarized environment like Spain’s, further underscores the value of this Portuguese approach.