>>53894461 Eh, not really. At least ours. We had 6 coups along our history and one of them helped paving the way to Peronism (1943), two of them overthrew two of the actual good presidents we've had (1930 and 1966) and the last one ruined our country beyond repair and put us in shame (1978).
>>53895400 Yes, immediatly after independence from Spain Then the Triple Alliance War happened because of a warmongering psycho thinking he could take on 3 nations at once, one of them being a literal empire We've been in a downward spiral ever since
>>53895678 This. Discontinuity of power is always bad.
If he didn't want to have a monarchy anymore, he should've transitioned in a much better way; laying the cultural and governmental groundwork for a quality republic, not just throwing his hands up when a shitty coup happened.
>>53896053 It's a general lefty perspective of the war and that era. If you talk to most historians (here or otherwise), that's the version they are inclined to teach. I have seen a few interviews with paraguayan teachers, and that's basically their mindset. I never said that average paraguayans actually believe this
>>53895775 He wrote in letters that he only saw Brazil as a republic after him, since he didn't believe that his daughter would be able to make a decent Empress, and republics were the natural and enlightened way forward. Too bad he was too tired after ruling for an entire life. He actually supressed any resistance from loyalists, and accepted his exile peacefully. :(
>>53896428 The emperor-scholar, always with a book at his side. Protected enlightment, freedom of expression and prevented the country from balkanizing and becoming a bunch of retarded dictatorship like spanish america. The man was raised to love his country and was loved by most. What's not to like about the guy?
He also fucked the british by sinking a few ships and not allowing them to gunship-diplomacy their way into forcing us to make bad deals with them
>>53896496 The point here is that he didn't do anything. Brazilians are just really ignorant about economy, so if it's growing they assumed it's because of the leader in charge and not because of commodities boom or economic engines like China and USA growing super fast and being hungry for Brazilian resources.
>>53895054 Kek we could say the same about our cunt. Just change the numbers of coup d'état to 3. Peron to Getúlio Vargas. Peronism for populism and the dates. I've a feeling we won't have cash to pay international debts very soon
>>53896428 He brought stability and growth to the country in a time of crisis. During the standoff with the british, that tried to use gunboat diplomacy on us, he stood his ground and international court ultimately decided on his favour. During the Paraguayan war, he wanted to lead the army himself, but the court ruled against it. He then went not as Emperor, but as he put it, as a Fatherland Volunteer. He also was a heavy supporter of abolisment of slavery, which ended up happening during his reign. He was also heavily educated, maintaining friendships with various scholars around the world, like Dawkins and Nietzsche. When you read about him, you can just tell that he loved his country and wished that his people lived better and happier lives, above everything else.
>>53896927 >luso internal meme not really. Most brazilians who are reasonably educated in their own history sort of like him. You don't need to be a monarchist to like D. Pedro II. There's just something regal and noble about the man that makes him the most remarkable leader we ever had
>>53897024 There's literally zero merit. Even his populist welfare horseshit was made up by the government before him, he just put it in a nicer package and was charismatic enough to sell it to the poor and make himself a messiah. He's literally done nothing of value
Fernand Henrique Cardoso before him can at least be given some credit for creating the plano Real, which was fairly contested and controversial at the time, and today most people agree that it helped the country considerably. Lula is a worthless bag of shit
>>53897470 he was also against welfare, saying that the poor would sell their votes for food/money. I'm not even angry for disagreeing with him ideologically, be it left or right. His only ideology is money and power; he's literally an opportunistic snake. Anyone who still believes in him is either ignorant or a traitor
>>53897505 Porto Alegre is very strong in leftism, the countryside is who votes for the right most of the time.
I lived there during the elections and even some rightwing and central people disliked Aécio.
The media manipulating the news to make Dilma look bad and Aécio look good was also a common topic, in the end, it's easy to understand why she won there. If PSDB had a slightly better candidate (maybe even FHC) I bet they would have won.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.