The End of the Beginning: Lula Beats Bolsonaro’s Son, but Our Battle Against Trumpism Is Far From Over

By The Editorial Team

October 25, 2026

Brazilians have delivered a historic result with consequences far beyond their borders. For everyone who believes democracy must serve ordinary people—not billionaires, oligarchs and political dynasties—the victory offers a reason to hope, and a reminder of how much remains at stake

On November 10, 1942, after the Allied victory at El Alamein, Winston Churchill offered a memorable warning against confusing a turning point with a final victory: “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” Brazil’s election brings that historic phrase to mind. History has a way of repeating its lessons, challenging us to learn from our mistakes and to cherish our victories with prudence rather than pride. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has defeated Flávio Bolsonaro, son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, in a remarkable comeback. Lula won approximately 51.75% of the valid vote against his opponent’s 48.25%, securing a fourth, nonconsecutive presidential term. The result is a Brazilian election victory—but its significance reaches far beyond Brazil.

For millions of people who have watched the growth of authoritarian politics, the concentration of wealth and the influence of billionaire power brokers, this result offers something unforgettable: evidence that the direction of a country is not predetermined. Lula entered the runoff behind Bolsonaro after the first round, and the final contest remained close. Yet voters moved the result in the other direction. The outcome is a reminder that political movements backed by powerful networks, wealthy billionaires with immense resources, and international allies can still be challenged at the ballot box. Democracy is not simply something delivered from above. It depends on people deciding that their voices still count—and using them.

The stakes were never confined to two men competing for the presidency. The Bolsonaro political movement has been closely aligned with Donald Trump’s political world, and Flávio Bolsonaro presented himself as the successor to his father’s movement. His victory would have strengthened the position of a conservative bloc seeking closer alignment with Trump’s Washington. Lula’s reelection instead preserves Brazil’s independent course and delivers a setback to that project in Latin America’s largest country. It does not end Trumpism in Brazil or elsewhere. But it demonstrates that its advance is neither automatic nor irreversible.

At the heart of this struggle lies an old democratic question: who is political power supposed to serve? A society may hold elections and still allow wealth to exercise an extraordinary influence over public life. Billionaires can command platforms, finance political networks and shape the information people encounter. Corporate interests can exert pressure on governments whose decisions affect millions. When economic power becomes political power, the formal promise of equal citizenship risks colliding with a reality in which some voices carry far more weight than others. The problem is not that success or wealth should disqualify anyone from public life. It is that no fortune should buy a privileged claim over democracy itself.

That is why oligarchy has always posed a challenge to democratic ideals. Democracy rests on the principle that citizens possess equal political standing, not that the richest should enjoy the greatest control over their common future. The danger becomes sharper when concentrated wealth converges with political movements that weaken independent institutions, discredit opponents, and treat checks on executive power as obstacles to be removed. Such concerns are not unique to Brazil. They form part of a wider international debate over democratic accountability, the influence of billionaire networks and the limits of political power.

Lula’s victory is therefore a moment of hope for people far beyond the Brazilian electorate. Across the Americas and elsewhere, supporters of democratic institutions will see the result as proof that organized citizens can resist political projects they regard as threatening their rights and social protections. Leaders across Latin America congratulated Lula, with several emphasizing democracy, sovereignty and regional cooperation. The response reflected the importance of Brazil’s direction to its neighbours and to the wider balance of political forces in the region.

But celebration must not become complacency. Nearly half of the voters who cast valid ballots supported Bolsonaro, and the political forces behind him remain powerful. Lula also faces a conservative Congress, economic pressures and the challenge of governing a deeply divided country. His victory cannot, by itself, resolve Brazil’s inequalities, rebuild every damaged institution or guarantee that democratic safeguards will endure. The measure of this moment will ultimately be what follows: whether ordinary people see improvements in their lives, whether public institutions remain accountable and free of corruption, and whether political opponents are treated as fellow citizens rather than enemies to be crushed.

For those of us watching from beyond Brazil, the lesson is neither that one election can save democracy everywhere nor that the struggle is hopeless. It is that the struggle remains open. The future is shaped by people who organize, speak, vote and insist that government answer to the public. The democratic cause cannot be outsourced to a president, a party or a wealthy benefactor. It requires sustained participation and solidarity across borders, especially when concentrated power tries to convince ordinary citizens that nothing can change.

The Democrats Must Build on the Momentum

Brazil’s lesson now reaches the United States, where the struggle against Trumpism will require more than outrage, commentary, or waiting for the next election. It will require sustained mobilization: expanding the grassroots networks built through campaigns in New York and elsewhere, bringing new people into political life, organizing in working-class communities, knocking on doors, listening to voters and building coalitions that last beyond election night. New York’s recent progressive victories showed what coordinated volunteer networks and sustained, person-to-person organizing can accomplish, even against better-funded opponents.

Those networks must grow, reach beyond their strongest urban bases and connect democratic demands to the daily realities of housing, wages, healthcare and the cost of living. The answer to concentrated wealth is not simply to denounce billionaires; it is to build a popular movement strong enough to challenge their political influence. If Brazil’s election has renewed hope among defenders of democracy around the world, the task in America is to turn that hope into organization, participation and lasting political power. So, go out there and vote.

Ultimately, Lula’s victory belongs first to the Brazilian people, who made their choice in a close and consequential election. But its meaning travels. For everyone who fears a world in which billionaires and political dynasties gain ever-greater control over public life, Brazil has offered a powerful reminder that citizens are not spectators in their own democracies. Churchill’s words remain fitting: this is not the end of the struggle. It may, however, mark the end of a chapter in which the advance of Trumpism seemed inevitable and the beginning of a more determined fight to ensure that democracy serves the many, not the few.