Brasília at Midnight
evenmagazine.com
evenmagazine.com
The "coup" allegations are nothing but ridiculous. What kind of coups is done with ample defense opportunity and full validation of the Supreme Court? There's nothing flimsy about the fiscal fraud committed by the soon to be former president. And while this is not being considered for the impeachment process (because it happened after it had began), she is under investigation for obstruction of justice (for nominating Lula a minister in the hopes of escaping the corruption investigations), and people who worked for her party and who are now in jail have confirmed she was fully aware of the corruption scheme and money laundering in the form of campaign donations.
It's funny because in 92 the same politicians who are now claiming a coup is going on have voted in favor of impeachment on much lighter claims against the president at the time (including the same nonsense speeches as house members voted in congress).
The part about the outrage for the the end of the Ministry of Culture shows a lot of what's wrong with Brazil: everyone wants their own government tit to suck from. As if culture can be created by government bureocrats.
No wonder the previous government's cabinet had 38 ministries, including the Ministry of Fishing. At least it didn't come to a point where we had a Ministry of Happiness like in Venezuela.
Ermmm.. defense opportunity? A totally partisan-biased Supreme Court does not leave much for a defense strategy. That's like putting Benghazi to be judged by the GOP.
>_It's funny because in 92 the same politicians who are now claiming a coup is going on have voted in favor of impeachment_
Maybe because they're being consistent on their stances?
Yes. Multiple opportunities for the defense to expose its views and interview witnesses, both in congress and senate.
> A totally partisan-biased Supreme Court
The majority of the current Supreme Court has been appointed by in the Lula and Dilma governments and are strongly tied to their party, including a former lawyer of a party member who is now in jail.
If there's any bias, it's in favor of the accused.
LOL at "Temer out". This is really all that you people know how to do, right? "Itamar out", "FHC out", "Temer out"... It's only a coup attempt when it turns against you.
Your comments, otoh, are well done. Voted up
And in senate, the president of the Supreme Court leads the final judgement.
And remember, 8 of the 11 judges were appointed by Dilma's party. So if you'd expect bias, it would be towards supporting Dilma.
That is the general schema by which statist ("socialist") regimes hang on to power... that is until they have inflated themselves out of existence.
In Brazil it's political suicide to suggest cutting government expenses such as bloated programs and agencies (even though they are known to be infested by corruption). People are hit hard by our extremely high taxes but don't make the connection to the government inefficacy and corruption. They keep asking for more government services and programs. People hate our postal service (which has a monopoly on some sorts of deliveries), yet freak out at the idea of opening it to the free market.
The current president attempted to end the "ministry of culture" (which basically is a money gateway from our pockets to already-rich artists with political connections) and replace it with a smaller department. Teachers and university students brainwashed by the state-worshiping religion kept protesting until the president gave up and bought the ministry back. That has been happening to all his attempts at fixing things.
The center-left that you mention is demonized as "neoliberals" by the extreme left here, so I'm not really sure what your point is about that.
But there is an undeniable anti-market anti-individual freedom anti-conservatism bias in Brazilian schools. Examples of that are readily available if you google for it.
I do agree, though, that many people with right wing ideals dehumanize progressives, but those are more linked with the conservative and religious right than with libertarian or classical liberal ideals.
I consider myself a classical liberal and when exposing my views to left wing people have been called a fascist and many other adjectives that actually are dehumanizing and are the extreme opposite of what I believe in. I just don't care when people say that, because it just shows they don't have a clue of what my ideals are about and don't even care to listen.
All you did was giving an angry retort.
Inflation doesn't matter to socialists, because as long as the Mint's printers work they have all the cash they need to conduct a reverse osmosis on the nation's wealth directly into their cronies' pockets.
Then the cronies just save the money in some offshore bank, and the inflation works twice in their favor.
With socialism, the people is the only part getting the shaft. This has been like this for decades now.
Their leaders led Latin-American countries to social and economical disasters and now are facing impeachment or being replaced. The Kirchner family of Argentina were the first to fall after twelve years in power [2]. In Brazil, Dilma is standing the last phase of the impeachment trial after her party stood 14 years in power [3]. Maduro is trying everything to avoid to face a referendum that will get him removed from power [4].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foro_de_São_Paulo
[2] http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/argentinas-kirchner-...
[3] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/brazil-com...
The general structure of the world has been pretty similar since the 1990s, and as the years wear on we are finding out more and more how bankrupt both intellectually and morally it has been.
Argentina was led to the worst crisis in its history. So, most people here are really tired of the political class, both left and right being perceived as equally corrupt.
Yes, there are fanatical groups that support one or the other, but the vast majority just vote for the lesser evil... Kind of like how some people who I've talked to feel right now in the US, having to choose between Hillary and Trump...
In the 8 years before PT took power, the country finally had stable economics, decreasing unemployment and increasing income levels.
https://brasilfatosedados.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/desempreg...
There was a common headline at the time in newspapers: "apesar da crise", meaning "even though in a crisis", followed by the report of a new market/business sector record in profits.
I always saw my country as a place free of the type of conspiracy that vultures around US politics by pure incompetence of our own politicians to plan and execute things like that but the recent events gave me a reality check.
But I don't think this is what the parent poster was talking about.
A couple of months ago in a conversation with a Brazilian colleague of mine, who has been living in europe for some years now, the subject of Brazil's crisis popped up. He told me that, at least when compared with the economic crisis experienced in europe, Brazil's crisis was a crisis in name only, which barely had any impact on the economy in general and disposable income of the average brazilian in particular.
Now, having read your comment, I have to say that it fits precisely with the observations made by my brazilian colleague.
There are so many wrong and deceptive comments here, at news.y, that it really makes me sad about how much illusion was sold in those 12 years of PT government, and how many years and generations it'll take to fix this up.
Meanwhile in Spain the unemployment rate is around 22%.
You're unintentionally proved my point: Brazil's supposed crisis isn't a crisis at all when compared to what happened all across europe. A slight economic downturn doesn't make it a crisis.
- all persons that had a job, lost it and now are just receiving help from the government (but aren't looking for a job)
- all those who are receiving benefits from the government to receive a minimum wage, and prefer to live in that situation than tho seek for a job
- the almost 50% (I think) that have informal jobs, so aren't looking for one but don't contribute to the government providence (the gov. account that provides money to the benefits)
Yes, I agree with you that it isn't like Spain. But it's because the govn. spent much money giving social benefits without some "financial exit" ahead.
Exactly like some people calling the changes a "coup" have their reasons, but it doesn't compare with what happened (or almost happened) in Turkey.
(And sorry if I can't express myself in a better way in English)
This mentalitity of "everything will stay the same so let's do nothing" is harmful in my opinion. We must take down the current corrupt politicians, and if others replace them, we take them down too.
This line of reasoning makes no sense.
Mostly, I find Dilma's policies insufficient. Especially social ones (there are only 14 countries more unequal than Brazil, out of 176). But I don't find them 'destructive'.
You didn't answer the question though. Would it not be a coup if the new president defended policies which you consider "sufficient"?
That's so oversimplified, it's laughable.
The middle class want her out and the poor never participated in politics in Brazil, and it's no different now.
The real rich always made money from the government either way, since big companies (banking, construction, telecom, you name it) either get incentives and legislation that help hold monopolies, or have the government as primary clients.
Author is apparently ignorant about Brazil's socio economics and history. Considering the praising of the rich left, artists and Niemeyer (self-proclaimed communist architect of Brasilia, considered today a failure in city planning), his analysis not only lack in depth but also balance.
I'm very poor (my only comfort in life is my computer; have been using the same clothes for almost 10 years, commute for almost 2 hours on trains and buses to get to the "good parts" of my city etc.) and am I'm hit hard by Dilma and PT, because their policies ruined our economy and even fucking rice and beans (our staple food) is terribly expensive now (the dollar exchange rate is high as ever, so producers now prefer to export everything they can than selling locally).
In particular, it is clear the congress voted for her ousting due to a series of reasons unrelated to the allegations. One reason is the dismal state of the economy, likely due in no small part to Roussef's policy decisions. Another reason is that a majority of politicians, from all major parties, are facing serious corruption charges from a large, unprecedented, investigation conducted by the federal police, and the impeachment acts as a diversionaty tactic (there are recordings proving this is not a conspiracy theory). Lastly, there is the usual power struggle, that is fiercer and more complex in an environment with many political parties.
In all, a complex scenario that does not bode well for the immediate future of the Brazilllian democracy.
Dilma, on her part, gave in to the austerity camp (both left and right can't seem to give up this mentality) and made matters worse. In part, this was driven by inflation fear mongering by the media.
The economy was already slowing down in 2011, and Roussef's government lowered interest rates and started giving subsidies to certain sectors and companies in order to stimulate economic activity. Some economists said this was a bad idea with potential disastrous consequences considering the global slowdown that was happening. IMHO, they were spot on. The private companies that went under since then were mostly the ones that were financed by public money. It was a failure of cronyism.
Social and infrastructure spending might have been high, but I think they were actually insufficient. Politics and economics are too skewed to the right in Brazil. Look at our budget surpluses for the last few decades:
https://brasilfatosedados.wordpress.com/2014/12/07/3047-supe...
And then look at the UK's budget history:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u_6bLBEcvus/VIL2bc4et6I/AAAAAAAAB7...
Even Thatcher had deficits all along.
This is the most absurd out of touch with reality statement I've read this week.
Brazil has 30+ parties almost all with "social" or "socialist" in their name. It's 50 shades of red down here.
PT - Centre-left; PMDB - Centre; PSDB - Centre (implemented neoliberal agenda in the 1990s); PP - Centre-right/Right; PSD - Centre-right; PR - Centre; PSB - Centre-left/Left; PTB - Centre; DEM - Centre-right (this I find hard to believe); PRB - Centre-right.
The "right" or "centre-right" would get votes from democrats with a big smile...
The fiscal responsibility law is a thing. Governors and mayors have been taken down from office for much less.
These "renowned scholars" that you mention are all tied to the workers party so their views are absolutely biased. Even the Bar order of Brazil, knowingly left leaning and pro-workers party has declared support for impeachment.
> In all, a complex scenario that does not bode well for the immediate future of the Brazilllian democracy.
How come? This is democracy in action. The law and the constitution are being followed to the letter.
Did Collor's impeachment undermine our democracy?
About the other point, regarding the future of the country, I did not mean the impeachment going through would undermine our democracy - this sort of discussion has no place here. Just that the overall economical and political landscape is cloudy at best. Operation java-jato is likely a good thing, but a "Mani Pulite"-like outcome, with corrupt politicians passing essentially pro-corruption laws, and the ascension of an inept "strongman" (in italy it was Berlusconi) is something that can easily happen in the coming years.
I think it's more of an dehumanizing homage to concrete and the car.
With no place though for the supporting people, who ended living in rings of poverty around the designed opulence. Going on-and-of during hours everyday to serve the rich bureaucrats they support.
Having been there sometimes, it is disgusting.
Lucky, modernist city planning died out in most of the world. One only needs to walk through Brasilia or the suburbs of Paris to see the abomination that it became:
"...the car would abolish the human street, and possibly the human foot. Some people would have aeroplanes too. The one thing no one would have is a place to bump into each other, walk the dog, strut, one of the hundred random things that people do ... being random was loathed by Le Corbusier ... its inhabitants surrender their freedom of movement to the omnipresent architect."
There was a study a few years back showing how most Brazilians have a high distrust of each other, save for family and friends, meaning there's an individualism that prevails in regards to the former and an extreme cohesiveness with the latter (something I found to be true in my several years living there).
On another note, most Brazilians aren't patriotic [read: proud] -- something that, according to Brazilian anthropologist Roberto DaMatta, requires a coming-together of positive feelings regarding culture and the State (imagine a Venn Diagram where the middle section is patriotism and then imagine one where the two circles don't even intersect -- the latter is Brazil, according to DaMatta). There are countless reasons to be proud of their cultural diversity and output, but seemingly very few reasons to be proud of the State.
Brazilian economist Eduardo Giannetti, who recently published his book Trópicos Utópicos (Utopic Tropics), had the following to say about the current climate in Brazil in a recent El Pais article (from which I'm translating):
"Brazilians society is very individualistic, we have a lot of difficulty with anything related to collective action and organization. These protest movements, for example, are eruptions. They don't have any consistency or continuity, they are emotional explosions without any kind of commitment to unfolding or to [be made into a] project. In addition, Brazil has as an abstract aspirational reference to attain American affluence, but they are not prepared in their daily lives for the degree of commitment, dedication and discipline of work. It's like the Greeks wanting to live at a German standard without having German productivity. This doesn't add up. For a while cash transfers allowed this trick, but at some point it stops working. The new element in the world we are in now is that what was an ethical critique has now become an objective, biological question of survival. Reality has been imposed. Nature has limits. And not only external nature, but also the inner nature of man. This calculative civilizing, aggressively competitive, process based on the permanent logic of productivity attacks something very deep in the archaic psyche of the human being. He does not accept this well. There is a widespread malaise, a discontent with some valuable thing in life that is lost in this model. And Brazil, even with its slowness, maintains an even less damaging relationship with this deep psyche of our evolutionary past. Our emotional celebration of life is something we have to know how to cherish. It is a gift. We must recognize that Brazilian potential, to seek out a path that is ours and that reflects our values. We are fully capable of living at their level. In art and popular music we already attain this expression. What's missing is to translate it into practical life."
___
If anyone wants to see one of Niemeyer's rather abstract Brasília in Ruins paintings, it's here http://i.imgur.com/uY2gzKk.jpg