I am not going to lie. I myself was pretty much oblivious to Paraguay’s existence before being introduced to the documentary, 108: Cuchillo de Palo. Set during Stroessner’s dictatorship, it goes in search of the truth surrounding the director’s uncle, a gay ballet dancer who was found dead in his house one morning. It’s one of those documentaries that keeps you thinking for days.
Spurred on by curiosity to find out what being gay in Paraguay is like today, I did what everyone does when they cannot stop thinking about something: I googled it. A few amateur searches composed of a jumble of disconnected words regarding the LGBT community in Paraguay allowed me to delve into the topic. At some point, I stumbled upon an article headline from the country’s main news outlet, ABC Paraguay, reading: ‘First openly gay candidate speaks out against vote-buying’.
While the prevalence of ‘vote-buying’ is obviously condemnable, what caught my attention was the first part: the ‘first openly gay politician’. Having just read horror stories about the gay experience in South America’s most conservative country, I felt that I had to hear from him. A good dose of healthy stalking later, I found his Instagram profile, sent him a message, scheduled a Zoom call, and here we are. What follows is an interview with Federico Enciso, a 28-year-old master student in social work and the former candidate for the opposition party, PLRA (Authentic Radical Liberal Party), who just so happens to be gay:
Why did you decide to become a politician?
“Ever since I was a boy, politics has always interested me, despite the fact that my family was pretty much apathetic to the subject. I started investigating and became involved in my school’s student council. Though we initially only debated issues which affected education, we started contemplating the possibility of getting involved on other fronts, such as party politics. We all got involved because we wanted to – and still want to – discuss things which are simply not talked about in Paraguay. One of the things which we wanted to talk about was young people that political parties ignore.”
Is there a difference between Paraguayan young people’s attitude to politics and your parents’ generation?
“Paraguay’s main problem is that it went through one of longest dictatorships in Latin America, and the main ‘achievement’ of this dictatorship was to instil fear, indifference, and apathy towards politics in the population. With regard to LGBT issues, I guess things have got better, but they are far from perfect. Above anything else, people are afraid. Even though there is no law against homosexuality in Paraguay like there is in Russia, for example, the fear of social rejection is still stronger than ever. For instance, if you are gay, it’s harder to get a job and there are many cases of abuse, not only mental but also physical. And if you are transexual, everything is a thousand times worse.”
Why has so little changed since Stroessner’s dictatorship?
“Paraguay’s history is not like that of other South American countries. In Argentina, Chile, Brazil and Uruguay, dictatorships fell, giving way to – more or less – stable democracies with alternating governments. Here, the same party that supported the dictatorship is still in power and this makes change a lot harder. If you actually look at election results, you’ll see that most people don’t vote for the Colorado Party, but there’s a First-Past-the-Post system, which means that the opposition vote is split between three or four candidates. If the political system was different, a lot of change could have already been made in several areas.”
In which areas besides LGBT rights do you feel that Paraguay lags behind?
“One of the most basic things that I think is lacking in Paraguay is a true democratic tradition. If you look at some surveys, you’ll see that most Paraguayans would support an authoritarian regime. Even if we have been a democracy for a long time now, there is still an absence of democratic values. The other big issue, for me, is inequality. In Paraguay, there is no middle class; you are either crazy rich or you live in poverty. This inequality affects all areas of life: education, healthcare, and employment. Most jobs are precarious and pay peanuts. There is no real industry apart from agriculture in Paraguay, and, as a consequence, people cannot find good jobs. All of this is aggravated by the fact that Paraguay has one of the worst education systems in the world.”
In the last few years, several important Paraguayan politicians have made homophobic remarks, most notably the country’s former president, Horacio Cartes, who said he would ‘shoot himself in the balls’ if he had a gay son. What do you make of these comments?
“I think you have to split this topic in two. The first problem that we see is impunity. Politicians can say whatever comes to mind because they know that there are never any consequences. In fact, there is no law against homophobia in Paraguay. However, there is also another issue. In the past, people used to blame everything on communists in Paraguay. Anyone who criticised the government was a communist. If someone went out to protest against poverty, he was immediately labelled a communist. Not much has changed. Now, in Paraguay, the government blames everything on the UN’s ‘Vision 2030’. There’s a whole band of politicians who scare people saying that the LGBT community wants to indoctrinate children. All of this is merely a tactic to distract the population from the country’s real problems. Besides being homophobic, these politicians are also using this discourse with an aim in mind. For instance, Cartes is accused of being involved in narcoterrorism by the US government. Instead of taking these accusations seriously, all of Cartes’ political entourage has blamed them on the fact that the US ambassador to Paraguay is gay. He attributes the claims made against him to the dissonance between his conservative political views (as a defender of God, family and the fatherland) and the ambassador’s.”
How do you feel being an openly gay politician in such a conservative country?
“What I have noticed, since I am a public figure, is the power of social media. Because of what I do, I receive a non-negligible amount of hostility on my social platforms, but rarely in person. I know that it’s not just because I’m gay. It’s the whole package, you see? I’m gay, and I criticise the government. I don’t really let it affect me; often, on social media, there are profiles that are quite visibly fake or bots. What makes me happy is that I have received lots of messages of support, from lots of people who tell me that they would not have the guts to do what I do and are happy to see someone defending the cause.”
How was your coming out?
“My story does not reflect that of the majority. I was also supported by my family and friends, something which normally does not happen here. In Paraguay, if you come out, generally, you have to move out too. Hostility to gay people exists pretty much everywhere; maybe there is not so much discrimination in Asunción [the capital city], but that is not to say it does not exist.”
You now live in Argentina. Why did you decide to leave Paraguay?
“First and foremost, I’m here for academic reasons; I came to study here. In Argentina, public universities are good and accessible, something which cannot be said of universities in Paraguay. While education is a right set out in the Paraguayan Constitution, nobody respects the legislation in practice. The other reason why I am here is because I’m tired. Let me explain. Many of the people I knew in Paraguay who were involved in the same struggle went through a process of thinking things were going to change quickly to understanding that the problem was much deeper-rooted. Paraguay has been a democracy for over thirty years, but not much has changed over that time period. Partially, it was this lack of change which pushed me to leave. I was tired of seeing gay friends suffer for being who they were. It’s all very tiring. To be honest, I think I am going to stay in Argentina.”
Is there a difference in attitudes between Argentina and Paraguay?
“Just by crossing the river which separates the two countries, everything changes. It has been a while now that there is legislation which protects the rights of the LGBT community. In my university course, I have a fellow student who is trans in my class, and everybody calls her the name that she has chosen. I just can’t see this happening in Paraguay. All of this is a relief for me. Obviously, there are still conservative politicians, and, in fact, the president of Argentina is a conservative. Despite this, in general, things are much better, not just among young people but also among older generations who accept diversity.”
Do you not want to go back to Paraguay to try to change the situation?
“I could, if I wanted to, but I would have to give too much of myself. I would have to put in so much energy and put my mental health on the line in the process. I’ll give you an example. I remember that about two years ago I had a boyfriend, and we were lying down hugging each other on a beach when a man who worked for the local council came over to tell us that we couldn’t do what we were doing. At that moment, I faced two options: either to complain and make a scene, as I usually do, or to keep quiet and leave. The latter is what people usually do, because putting up a fight is tiring. It’s so tiring having to explain the obvious. I know this might seem like a bit of a petty example, but it’s a constant. All the little things that happen on a daily basis add up and affect your mental health. Paraguay is among the countries with the highest rate of young people with depression, anxiety…. It’s because of all of this that, at least for now, I am staying put in Argentina. I love my family and friends, but the political situation in Paraguay is just too complicated.”
All this time that I had been speaking with Federico Enciso, I could not help remembering what Augusto Roa Bastos, by far the country’s most famous novelist, had said during an interview in exile in 1986: ‘Today, Paraguay is a republic of besieged citizens. Half of the population has been corrupted, and the other half domesticated.’ Almost forty years later, the phrase still fits. Sure, Paraguay is no longer a dictatorship, there are no longer arbitrary arrests, and people do not disappear from one moment to the next without any explanation, but the country still lives in a state of fear and fatigue. It would be much easier if Paraguay could start a blank page; however, in the real world, this is impractical. Paraguay must not fake dementia about its dark past, but recognise the damage inflicted by the Stroessner’s dictatorship. Individuals, like Federico Enciso, who refuse to be domesticated or corrupted, will be the protagonists in the next chapter of Paraguay’s history.
What are Conservative Party Members thinking?
Friday 2nd September is creeping ever closer and with a government that seems to be set on inaction until then in the midst of the biggest cost of living crisis in decades, for millions it can’t come soon enough. Before then though, 0.3% of the population will decide who the next Prime Minister is and all signs now seem to suggest that that person will be Liz Truss.
Personally, I see it as a tragedy on several levels but, above all, I cannot cease to be totally baffled by the polls that show Truss will win by such a landslide. Not only is it now with seeming daily regularity that a new independent report, financial expert, or ‘Tory grandee’ points out her economic plans are both unfundable and inadequate. More than anything, the Conservative Party Members seem set to condemn themselves to losing the next election by electing a leader and resulting cabinet that is beyond impalpable for the general population.
I suppose the first step in trying to get inside the mind of Tory members is understanding who they really are, something that is notoriously difficult and explains why opinion polls in leadership contests vary so much in comparison with those of general elections. Although the information is not officially published, Tim Bale, professor of politics at Queen Mary University, concluded nearly ten years of study on this and told the FT last month that “There hasn’t been much change in the demographics of the Tory grassroots since we began our research on party members back in 2013.” The research found that, rather unsurprisingly, that members are disproportionately older men. 63% were male (compared to roughly half of the UK population), their median age is 57 (the national average is 40), and 80% fall in the so-called ABC1 category of the most highly-paid demographic group (this makes up 53% of the country). They also match the classic stereotype of being white and right-leaning on issues, with 76% voting for Brexit and 95% identifying as White British in a country where that makes up just 83% of the population. Now, that is a lot of numbers, but the fact that those voting on our next leader come from such a small and narrow segment of society is not only plainly a crazy and scarcely believable part of our democratic system but goes some way to explaining how and why they have leaned so heavily on Truss over Sunak. They have rewarded her ludicrous attempts to evoke Thatcherite policies which don’t fit the current economic climate and, much like the Foreign Secretary’s desperate efforts to emulate Thatcher’s personality and dress sense, are outdated.
Despite this, in fact for this very reason, one would think that the constant comments from some of the Tory party’s oldest, most successful, and most well-respected names, about just how baseless much of Truss’ economic policies are, would have swayed more of the base towards Sunak. Kenneth Clark has described her approach as “nonsense and simplistic” and related it to techniques that might be used by a Venezuelan government. Former leaders Michael Howard and William Hague, as well as well-respected current MPs such as Dominic Raab, Jeremy Hunt, and Michael Gove, have all taken to the airwaves and newspapers in the past few days to speak against the idea that tax cuts can resolve the crisis. Even Lord Lamont, Treasurer in the Thatcher government remembered so fondly by much of the conservative party base, has publicly backed Sunak over the holes in Truss’ plans. It isn’t only individuals who think that her plans are misguided either: the IFS joined countless other economists last week in pointing out that her current ideas are simply unfundable unless they are accompanied by spending cuts.
What makes all of this even more crazy and difficult for me to get my head around is that the members seem blissfully unaware of just how unelectable Truss is for the electorate as a whole. With a general election looming in 2024 you would think that there would be an appetite for a relatively inoffensive leader who appeals to as broad a base as possible. Whereas Sunak has at least shown his ability to appeal to a large spectrum in the past, earning himself the nickname ‘Dishy Rishi’ during his Eat Out to Help Out glory days, Truss has never shied away from bulldozing ahead with unpopular policies and divisive comments. Whether that is upsetting Scots by saying that the best way to deal with their democratically elected leader is “to ignore her” or regular workers by telling them to put in some more “graft”, Truss trails Keir Starmer and rival Sunak in every poll of the general population. And if recent leaks of her planned cabinet are to be believed, placing Jacob Rees-Mogg as Levelling-up Secretary, she hardly appears to be planning a change of course on this front.
So – why? What is it that appeals? It might well be a case of Johnson continuity – indeed in surveys, many have said that they feel Sunak betrayed their leader by resigning and becoming one of the major catalysts for the Prime Minister’s downfall. In reality though, I think it is more of a case of the members being genuinely detached from the real world themselves. For whatever reason they don’t seem able to see their impending decision risks disaster for millions of people across the country by worsening current financial pressures as well as putting them in a catastrophic position ahead of the next general election. Two years is a long time in politics, but right now I struggle to see why on earth the turkeys are voting for Christmas.
Image: CC 2.0 – UK Government via Flickr.