SOME FACTS AND PERSPECTIVES ABOUT BRAZILIAN ACTUALITY
It is somewhat difficult to
seize Brazilian reality, not just because it is such a vast and complex country
but, also, because opinions and even news about it are usually based on hearsay
or ideological views of facts. I will try here to give my own view and be as
equidistant as possible of what is happening or about to happen in the country
these days.
Last year, one of the fiercest
presidential electoral campaigns in our history took place. Aécio Neves, the
candidate of right-wingers, had been blamed for building airports using public
money in small cities of Minas Gerais, the state he governed, near the farms of
his relatives and friends. Also, for paying one of the lowest salaries in Brazil
to public high-school teachers, using non-declared state companies’ money in
his campaign, as well as for indicating the wife of state’s vice-governor to
preside Minas Gerais Audit Court (TCE-MG). Besides this, he was pointed out as
having full support of mainstream oligopolistic news media and a big part of
Brazilian élites and corporation groups and being in favor of privatizing
public services. And finally, for spanking a former girlfriend in public.
Nevertheless, his campaign time
was not used to defend him of all those accusations (which he just labeled as
‘lies’, although many of them had been fully proven) – but to accuse the other
candidate, Dilma Roussef from PT (Labor Party, reformist and moderately
left-wing), of being a corrupt socialist and a bad public manager – even if
he’s failed to give any evidence of what he said. In exchange, Dilma Roussef’s
television and radio time was used mostly to show the achievements of her
ongoing office and to present what she intended to do during a second mandate,
if reelected.
Hate and
economic terror campaigns were moved both through mainstream and alternative
media by using its cartoonists and columnists and through Internet’s social
media. Both sides attacked one another and, despite the many social and
economic achievements of Dilma’s first mandate and of her predecessor’s (Lula, also
from PT), mainstream oligopolistic media almost prevailed. Economic power has
played an important factor for both sides, but mostly on Aécio’s side due to
his several multimillionaire corporative sponsors.
Dilma has been reelected in
October 2014 with a difference of 3.5 million votes (or, as we say here, 50
Maracanã stadiums of difference). Not much in relative terms, but a lot in
absolute numbers. Not a month after elections elapsed before the beginning of
accusations against her and a big campaign against Petrobras state oil company,
which had been under investigation since the beginning of 2014 for alleged
irregularities in dealings with contractors. A number of necessary economic and
fiscal adjustments announced in December 2014 was a reason for new criticism,
both from some of her supporters as from mainstream media and opposition in
general.
Now, as the investigations against
Petrobras progress, politicians from different parties are under Federal Police
and Public Attorney’s scrutiny for having supposedly received money from these
same contractors – which would pay bribes to be favored in public biddings.
Even if PT is not the main party under investigation and of general knowledge
that this practice might have been going on for decades, opposition blames
Dilma and PT for being guilty and for benefiting the most of the so-called
scheme. One thing to be remarked here is that both the judge in charge of the
preliminary instruction, as well as many of the public attorneys and federal
policemen involved in the investigation (Operação Lava Jato), have publicly
declared support to Aécio and disapproval to PT, Dilma and Lula in social networks before elections.
Repeating what took place
during Lula’s second mandate, a massive negative campaign is being moved by
mainstream media and opposition and even impeachment cries are heard. What
should be an impartial investigation and trial progressively becomes a foremost
political issue. Inflation campaigns and trucker strikes are being organized by
the very media and corporations that strongly opposed Dilma before elections.
Negative campaigning against Brazil’s main oil company (one of the world’s
biggest) Petrobras is so permanent and deep that the company had to resize its
investments for the next years and its balance shift had to be published
without being vouched by a trusted external auditing company. Company’s stock prices
have substantially dropped in Brazilian stock market, although many important
investors here and abroad keep buying it or refuse to sell it. Behind these
pressures and permanent negative campaigns, some say, are Petrobras rivals who
want to buy it out.
Some facts: Petrobras’ actual
value, measured by its assets, has multiplied over 6 times in the last decade. The
same media which are against any media regulation are also responsible for
negative campaigns – both against Brazilian economy as against Petrobras and
Dilma. They are the ones who, along with political opposition parties, try to
promote – even without saying – a presidential
impeachment and the fall of Petrobras only to blame PT for it. In
Brazil, this strategy is compared to what happened in Paraguay a few years ago,
when legally elected president Lugo was ousted by Congress on grounds of
failing to perform his presidential duties and responsibilities. Some also see this as a forced third
electoral shift.
Two huge demonstrations have
been scheduled: one in favor of Dilma, Petrobras and democracy for March 13,
and another, by the opposition, for March 15. March 13 is mostly spontaneous and
does not count with mainstream support to be publicized and covered, while
March 15 does. Among the groups which support March 15 we have: adepts of
former military régime (Revoltados On Line and Coturno Noturno, for instance), businessmen,
conservative journalists, neoliberals and people who would rather see Aécio and
his group in power now. Supporting Dilma, Petrobras and democracy, we have labor
unions, progressive church leaders, intellectuality, moviemakers and students’
representative institutions, as well, of course, as a big part of the people
who voted for her.
(written by Flávio Prieto and @AlziraLopes18)
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário