With the finding by Nobel laureate Daron Acemoglu that the “success of societies depends on the quality of institutions”, respect for norms and compliance with democratic procedures becomes particularly important as a way of legitimizing them and keeping them credible. There is, in fact, an ethos and ethics required to effectively consider oneself working for the common good and the achievement of the public interest.
Particularly from political actors, it is expected that in their actions, both in the process of gaining power and in fulfilling their mandate as government or opposition, they seek to safeguard the constitutional order and citizens’ trust in the democratic system as basic assumptions for a future of success.
Unfortunately, the current trends of politicians wanting to act like celebrities, in often outright demonstrations of narcissism, and making politics more of a spectacle to arouse emotions than a process for visioning, deciding and acting go in the opposite direction. This option is justified as a requirement of current times. It is said that people’s attention is minimal, the attraction for what shocks and entertains is greater and that people tend to confuse breaking rules, customs and legality itself with demonstrations of authenticity and a certain masculinity. The truth is that there are those who win elections by following these paths and it is clear that more and more parties and personalities are allowing themselves to slip into this type of political mobilization.
The problem is that such practices, by undermining trust in institutions, limit the effectiveness of the policies to be implemented within the scope of the mandate received at the polls. The socio-economic malaise that eventually sets in contributes to the polarization of society, which makes dialogue difficult and causes the rise of populist and demagogic discourse. This creates a vicious circle that can lead to stagnation or insufficient economic growth to eradicate poverty and meet people’s expectations. The director of the IMF, Kristalina Georgievain a speech at the October 22nd meetings of the Bretton Woods institutions, drew attention to the expansionist tendency of state budgets in several countries motivated by this type of speech that increases the share of debt service in the budget, removing fiscal space to respond to future crises and to invest for further economic growth.
The great difficulty today is finding parties and personalities with the courage and audacity to refuse to go down this path of reducing politics to a spectacle and the leader’s personal cult. And this is so because it does not always work for those who choose to focus on the country’s issues with vision, strategy and reforms aimed at greater growth and employment. An example is what is happening in the United States, where after years of spectacle and the personalization of politics by Donald Trump, President Biden opted for a return to a certain normality and innovative policies and yet society remains highly polarized. Due to the reforms, the country may have successfully overcome the polycrisis situation and be considered “the envy of the world”, according to the latest issue of the Economist magazine (19 Oct), but the malaise continues and could weigh in favor of Trump in the elections in a fortnight. It is no coincidence that not everyone dares to do different.
This lack of boldness, however, did not always exist. In Cape Verde, in the nineties, the winds of change gave the country an opportunity to emerge from economic stagnation and grow with freedom and security. The leadership of then Prime Minister Dr. Carlos Veiga was crucial to achieving the two major objectives of implementing democracy and building a market economy. He had received a mandate on January 13, 1991 with a qualified majority of two thirds of the electorate, which was renewed five years later in the legislature with a higher percentage of votes. The difficulties in continuing with political and economic reforms in the face of resistance in society and tensions within his party did not dissuade him from carrying them out. He lost his qualified majority in his first term and regained it in the following elections.
Over the ten years of government, Dr. Carlos Veiga managed, through permanent dialogue, to maintain, in a party that was still a political movement (it appeared in 1990), a sufficient majority for the country to adopt a democratic and liberal Constitution. It was then able to continue with the liberalization of the economy and reform of the financial and tax system and even move forward with privatizations in an effort to attract foreign direct investment and build a market economy. Under his leadership, the country found an innovative solution to the heavy internal debt inherited from state-owned companies in a Trust Fund that, associated with the Exchange Agreement with Portugal, and later with the European Union, served as the basis for the following decades of low inflation and monetary stability and exchange rate.
According to the description made in the World Bank Memorandum of July 14, 2023, “Cape Verde’s economic model has shown signs of fatigue since the 2008 global financial crisis” and that “the annual growth rate fell from an average of 10.1% in the 1990s to 7.2% in the 2000s and to 1.2% in the 2010s.”we can see how the country still seems to be benefiting from the reforms of the 1990s, but with diminishing effects. The growth potential, which according to the BM was 6% in the 1990s, increased to 3.5% after 2010 due to the loss of productivity, which in turn is attributed to structural rigidity resulting from a lack of reforms.
Despite the obvious gains from the reforms, or perhaps due to the real disruptions that put the country on another level, Carlos Veiga ended up having to face yet another split within the majority party, but not before finalizing a review of the Constitution in 1999 that helped to consolidate the democratic regime. A year later, his party lost the elections and one of the reasons, according to Dr Oníssimo Silveira in the book by José Vicente Lopes (2016) “is that the MpD brought not only an idea of modernity, but also the modernity of the institutions that the people in its conservative majority would not have accepted it in a normal situation”. After years of tensions due to the reforms, the electoral defeat is understandable because according to him “no one likes to live in surprises”. Meanwhile, the effects of the reforms of the 1990s are still being felt.
In democracies it is normal not to be rewarded at the polls for making profound reforms or other bold actions. A classic case is that of Churchill, who lost the elections to the Labor Party in 1944 despite having led the United Kingdom during World War II. The dimension of true statesmen can be seen in the fact that they did not stop doing what had to be done for fear of defeat in the elections. The role of the party and its leaders should not be limited to conquering and maintaining power at all costs. It must fundamentally be about serving people and the country with the humility and detachment of someone who holds a popular mandate and being aware of the complex reality of problems for whose resolution everyone’s participation is required and it is assumed that no one is indispensable.
On the occasion of Dr. Carlos Veiga’s 75th birthday, celebrated on October 21st, Expresso das Ilhas pays him a well-deserved tribute for his leadership in the construction of Freedom and democracy in Cape Verde and for his example as a serene and dialoguing statesman, and forger of wills who made it possible to build the legal and institutional framework that led the country to modernity.
Humberto Cardoso
Text originally published in the printed edition of Expresso das Ilhas nº 1195 of October 23, 2024.
