‘No one issue sparked the protests but surveys revealed that the principal motives were related to anger at corruption.’ Photograph: Guilherme Dionizio/Demotix/Corbis
"Brasil já tem o suficiente de promessas não cumpridas"
"Historicamente antagonistas de direita e as oligarquias logo foram varridos para festa de base partidária dos Trabalhadores, tudo feito em nome da "governabilidade".
Fernando Meirelles
Dilma Rousseff has presided over an increasingly compromised and inept government. No wonder there are calls for her impeachment
A million and a half protesters took to the streets in Brazil on Sunday in the biggest popular movement since the pro-election demonstrations in 1984. The mass gathering felt like a joyful celebration of civic rights; it was not organised by any political party, but over the social networks by hundreds of individual groups scattered around Brazil. A new digital democracy was in action once again. No sole issue sparked the protests but surveys revealed that the principal motives were related to anger at corruption; there were demands that President Dilma Rousseff be impeached and protests against the Workers’ Party administration and a congress so impervious to reality that it seems to inhabit a glass dome.
On the Friday before the protests, pro-government rallies had been held on a much smaller scale. Even then the government’s supporters protested against the loss of workers’ rights and demanded political reform, as well as an increase in teachers’ salaries. Some placards went as far as calling the president a traitor.
Brazil, a historically unequal country, has been slowly reducing the gulf between rich and poor. Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s election in 2002 led many to believe that this gap would narrow radically. That year, China’s growth led to an increase in commodity prices that lasted until the crisis in 2008. Brazil found itself with a surplus that allowed the new administration to do something never seen in the country before – cater to both the financial markets that attract foreign capital, and help the poorer sections of society with income distribution programmes and cheap credit. The country went through a euphoric consumerist upheaval. Salaries increased, jobs were abundant, living standards rose. Economic activity was booming and there seemed to be no going back – we had become part of a virtuous circle. It was the first time in 50 years that I read only good news when I opened the papers in the morning.
'This absurd system has been going on for years, but everyone thought that a leftist party would change the picture.'
In 2006, the Workers’ party was involved in a scandal regarding the buying of congressmen’s votes, but Lula denied knowing anything about it and was re-elected. The sense of euphoria continued, but in 2008, the financial crisis hit. The president, now in his second term, assured us that it was no big deal – just a ripple that wouldn’t have any effect on Brazil. Other problems, such as a lack of investment in infrastructure and education, became apparent, but all were minimised so that the party would win the 2010 elections.
Rousseff, then largely unknown, was presented to Lula’s supporters and consequently elected. The work of the “creator”, she was given the epithet of “creature”, but Lula’s choice made sense. He held complete sway over the new president and took it upon himself to put together a new ministerial cabinet by portioning out favours in exchange for political support in congress. The more votes a party had, the more ministers they could put into office. Historically rightwing antagonists and oligarchies were soon swept up into the Workers’ party partisan base, all done in name of “governability”.
Methods such as this are now institutionalised in modern Brazil and take place shamelessly, in the open. On first being elected Rousseff endeavoured to continue as before, but commodity prices had fallen, the government’s political machinery had become more expensive and there was no way to make ends meet. Even so, the president did not make the necessary changes to the economy. Her term ended in 2014 with inflation knocking on the door and overpricing allegations against almost all the ongoing infrastructure projects. The country’s growth fell to 0.2%, an energy crisis began taking shape and the middle class was left in debt, with banks demanding the easy money they had lent throughout the previous years. Spring had come and gone.
The re-election of the Workers’ party for its fourth term was now a high stakes game. Its presidential campaign paid scant attention to the truth. On TV, the party depicted a Brazil that just did not exist, ignoring all the problems that the country was facing. It devoted much of the debate to personal attacks on the opposition and continued this strategy throughout the campaign, endlessly asserting that its adversaries would increase energy tariffs, cut workers’ benefits and adopt a recessive monetary policy. It amounted to a revival of the old “us” versus “them” discourse and divided the country as never before. Politics was a topic to be carefully avoided during friendly get-togethers. The marketing strategy worked and Rousseff was re-elected with a slim 3% majority.
‘The first measures taken by Dilma Rousseff were to cut workers’ benefits and increase energy tariffs, exactly what she had said her opponents would do.’ Photograph: Xinhua News Agency/REX/Xinhua News Agency/REX
Upon taking office again in January, the first measures taken by the president were to cut workers’ benefits and increase energy tariffs, doing exactly what she had said her opponents would do if elected. Already without the support of half the population, she has now lost the support of her own constituents, who feel betrayed. A survey released on 18 March found that 62% of the population considers her government bad or very bad. When the going gets rough, everybody runs for shelter. Lula does not want this crisis to jeopardise his return in 2018, and Rousseff has lost support within her own party .
The president is now isolated, trying to rein in increasing inflation and a water and energy crisis, as well as dealing with an ongoing investigation into the embezzlement of funds from Petrobras, the largest company in the country. Much of the population believes that the president knew about the scheme to route money from the oil company to finance party activities and to fatten the wallets of a chosen few. And it is this that led 20% of the protesters to demand her impeachment, while the others clamoured for the end of corruption.
No one argues that the Workers’ party invented corruption in Brazil. Political campaigns here are financed by companies, mostly construction companies that later demand they be repaid in major construction jobs from those in power. This absurd system has been going on for years, but everyone thought that a leftist party that preached sincerity would be able to change the picture. This did not happen and the populace’s patience has run out, as demonstrated by Sunday’s protests.
There is still some good news. Executives from some of the biggest construction companies in Brazil have been jailed for their involvement in the Petrobras case. To have millionaires with full access to government officials in jail is unique in Brazilian history. Plea-bargains with some of these businessmen mean that there is a good chance some of the congressmen involved will be punished. If they get their just deserts it will be the beginning of an anxiously awaited process of political reform. As in all crises, an opportunity is always on the horizon.