How Bolsonaro Inspired by Trump Created Imaginary Enemies and Led to Brazil’s Black Sunday

The storming of the three main symbols of the Brazilian republic – the supreme court, the national congress and the presidential palace – is the kind of event that could shape the country’s history. While Brazil has gone through military coups and social turmoil since it became independent in 1822, never before have Brazilians witnessed such widespread disregard for political institutions.

This is a story that starts around 2018, when Jair Bolsonaro – then a lackluster congressman known for supporting the military dictatorship and publicly praising notorious torturers – launched his presidential candidacy. In the name of God, the fatherland and traditional family values, the retired army captain vowed to “drain the swamp” of politics and usher in a new era for Brazil.

In his vision, state policies would no longer be necessary. Political authority would naturally stem from business people, religious leaders, armed militiamen and – above all – the president’s messianic figure.

This combination of authoritarian populism and social Darwinism is not new. It lies at the foundations of far-right movements that have gained momentum worldwide in recent years. And it sheds light on the Bolsonarist phenomenon, helping us make sense of Brazil’s “black Sunday”.

Bolsonarism is a profoundly anti-democratic movement that conflates elements of the US far-right – most notably Trumpism – and Brazil’s long history of social inequality and militarism into a whole new digital language. WhatsApp and social media have been key to attracting supporters that have become increasingly suspicious of the political system over the previous decade.

This popular disillusionment among certain groups has been mostly due to corruption scandals, growing urban violence and to policies under the then – and now again – president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, that favored Brazil’s poorest.

In his path to the presidency, Bolsonaro was able to tap into people’s emotions. He brought millions of Brazilians together by mobilizing elements of hatred, fear and resentment, and offered them something to fight against – namely, communism.

Undermining democracy

For the start of his tenure, Bolsonaro moved decisively to undermine Brazil’s democratic institutions and state capacity on the grounds that he was saving the country from communism. By pitting his supporters against imaginary enemies he could successfully dodge accusations of incompetence, corruption – and even crimes against public health during the COVID pandemic which killed nearly 700,000 Brazilians.

The Bolsonaro administration’s survival might be down to the loyal support of a coalition of business people, the farming lobby, evangelical leaders and members of the armed and security forces. A key element of his governing strategy was to attack whoever spoke against the interests of these groups: the supreme court, congress and the mainstream media among his favorite targets.

There have been allegations that on September 7 2021, Brazil’s independence day, Bolsonaro planned to summon supporters to cause turmoil in the streets across the nation. The idea was supposedly to justify a military takeover through a state of emergency. However, the higher ranks of the armed forces did not provide clear support.

This does not mean that the military are innocent when it comes to the undermining of Brazilian democracy. On the contrary, they have systematically disregarded their constitutional role by engaging in partisan politics and taking up civilian positions in the federal administration.

Bolsonaro’s sect of fanatical supporters seem to want Brazil’s far-right president to be the country’s absolute ruler even without the need for elections, following a distorted interpretation of the constitution. The military at least pretended they wanted elections to be held, but did not hesitate in joining the president’s chorus of electoral fraud.

Preparing the ground

In October 2022, Bolsonaro faced a resurgent Lula in the presidential election. Anticipating defeat, the incumbent president spent months sowing suspicion over the voting machines and questioning the integrity of the electoral process. Bolsonaro’s loss by a thin margin after a run-off ballot was enough for him to refuse to concede. Large numbers of his 58 million voters followed suit.

Bolsonaro’s silence for the two months between elections and Lula’s inauguration appears to have served as a nod and a wink to rally his supporters, who blocked roads, threatened political opponents and built camps in front of army barracks, all the while calling for military intervention. Days before the inauguration, the president fled the country, flying to Florida, suggesting that his life was at risk in Brazil. His supporters seem to have interpreted this as a call to action.

With this background, it was just a matter of time before the Brazilian version of the January 6 US Capitol riot took place. It seems that coup-mongers decided to act after Lula took office and counted on the complicity and negligence of Brazil’s armed forces and state security.

It was both embarrassing and shocking to see police officers calmly sipping coconut water while protesters stormed into Brasília’s main public buildings. Army soldiers who should have been securing the presidential palace did nothing as criminals destroyed or stole works of art, furniture and government documents.

Swift response

Lula’s response has been swift. He issued a decree establishing a federal military intervention in Brasília to stop the chaos, which has so far been responsible for the arrest of over 1,500 rioters. We are also witnessing unprecedented coordination between executive and judiciary branches to investigate who is behind the attacks on Brazilian democracy.

For Lula, it will now be crucial to identify and clamp down on the members of this violent far-right network. This does not mean only those who invaded the buildings, but also the people that funded them, who incited the protests and who created the narratives responsible for the coup-mongering of recent years.

If Lula’s mission is to bring the country together again, his administration must ensure that Brazil will no longer serve as a laboratory for extremist tactics and ideologies as it did over the past few years.

Bolsonaro, meanwhile, remains in hospital in Florida after complaining of intestinal pains related to a stabbing he suffered during the 2018 election campaign. He may have distanced himself from the storming of the government buildings. But now the discussion will focus on whether – and when – he will return to Brazil and, if he does, whether he will face charges of inciting insurrection.

Guilherme Casarões is a professor of Political Science at São Paulo School of Business Administration (FGV/EAESP)

This article was originally published in The Conversation. Read the original article here: https://theconversation.com/brazil-insurrection-how-so-many-brazilians-came-to-attack-their-own-government-197547

Tags:

You May Also Like

The Alvorada Palace and its garden - Ichiro Guerra/PR

Priest Couldn’t Get Rid of Evil Spirit. So Brazil’s President Moved Out of His Palace

In an interview to weekly news magazine Veja, Brazilian President, Michel Temer, confided what ...

High Abstention in Brazil Shows an Angry and Frustrated Electorate

The first round of municipal elections in Brazil having transpired with no major incidents, ...

Lula speaks in Porto Alegre

Sentenced to 12 Years in Jail, Lula Says Only Death Will Take Him Out of Politics

A Brazilian appeals court on Wednesday rejected an appeal by former Brazilian President Luiz ...

It seems the future never arrives in Brazil What Lies Ahead in Brazil? Brazil Has No Exemplary Past or Present. But What Lies Ahead for the Country? Europeans, US, developed country, developing country. Bolsonaro, future B. Michael Rubin For years, experts have debated what separates a developing country from a developed one. The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of a country is one simple way to measure its economic development. Another way to measure a country's progress is the extent of public education, e.g. how many citizens complete high school. A country's health may be measured by the effectiveness of its healthcare system, for example, life expectancy and infant mortality. With these measurement tools, it's easier to gauge the difference between a country like Brazil and one like the U.S. What's not easy to gauge is how these two countries developed so differently when they were both "discovered" at the same time. In 1492 and 1500 respectively, the U.S. and Brazil fell under the spell of white Europeans for the first time. While the British and Portuguese had the same modus operandi, namely, to exploit their discoveries for whatever they had to offer, not to mention extinguishing the native Americans already living there if they got in the way, the end result turned out significantly different in the U.S. than in Brazil. There are several theories on how/why the U.S. developed at a faster pace than Brazil. The theories originate via contrasting perspectives – from psychology to economics to geography. One of the most popular theories suggests the divergence between the two countries is linked to politics, i.e. the U.S. established a democratic government in 1776, while Brazil's democracy it could be said began only in earnest in the 1980s. This theory states that the Portuguese monarchy, as well as the 19th and 20th century oligarchies that followed it, had no motivation to invest in industrial development or education of the masses. Rather, Brazil was prized for its cheap and plentiful labor to mine the rich soil of its vast land. There is another theory based on collective psychology that says the first U.S. colonizers from England were workaholic Puritans, who avoided dancing and music in place of work and religious devotion. They labored six days a week then spent all of Sunday in church. Meanwhile, the white settlers in Brazil were unambitious criminals who had been freed from prison in Portugal in exchange for settling in Brazil. The Marxist interpretation of why Brazil lags behind the U.S. was best summarized by Eduardo Galeano, the Uruguayan writer, in 1970. Galeano said five hundred years ago the U.S. had the good fortune of bad fortune. What he meant was the natural riches of Brazil – gold, silver, and diamonds – made it ripe for exploitation by western Europe. Whereas in the U.S., lacking such riches, the thirteen colonies were economically insignificant to the British. Instead, U.S. industrialization had official encouragement from England, resulting in early diversification of its exports and rapid development of manufacturing. II Leaving this debate to the historians, let us turn our focus to the future. According to global projections by several economic strategists, what lies ahead for Brazil, the U.S., and the rest of the world is startling. Projections forecast that based on GDP growth, in 2050 the world's largest economy will be China, not the U.S. In third place will be India, and in fourth – Brazil. With the ascendency of three-fourths of the BRIC countries over the next decades, it will be important to reevaluate the terms developed and developing. In thirty years, it may no longer be necessary to accept the label characterized by Nelson Rodrigues's famous phrase "complexo de vira-lata," for Brazil's national inferiority complex. For Brazilians, this future scenario presents glistening hope. A country with stronger economic power would mean the government has greater wealth to expend on infrastructure, crime control, education, healthcare, etc. What many Brazilians are not cognizant of are the pitfalls of economic prosperity. While Brazilians today may be envious of their wealthier northern neighbors, there are some aspects of a developed country's profile that are not worth envying. For example, the U.S. today far exceeds Brazil in the number of suicides, prescription drug overdoses, and mass shootings. GDP growth and economic projections depend on multiple variables, chief among them the global economic situation and worldwide political stability. A war in the Middle East, for example, can affect oil production and have global ramifications. Political stability within a country is also essential to its economic health. Elected presidents play a crucial role in a country's progress, especially as presidents may differ radically in their worldview. The political paths of the U.S. and Brazil are parallel today. In both countries, we've seen a left-wing regime (Obama/PT) followed by a far-right populist one (Trump/Bolsonaro), surprising many outside observers, and in the U.S. contradicting every political pollster, all of whom predicted a Trump loss to Hillary Clinton in 2016. In Brazil, although Bolsonaro was elected by a clear majority, his triumph has created a powerful emotional polarization in the country similar to what is happening in the U.S. Families, friends, and colleagues have split in a love/hate relationship toward the current presidents in the U.S. and Brazil, leaving broken friendships and family ties. Both presidents face enormous challenges to keep their campaign promises. In Brazil, a sluggish economy just recovering from a recession shows no signs of robust GDP growth for at least the next two years. High unemployment continues to devastate the consumer confidence index in Brazil, and Bolsonaro is suffering under his campaign boasts that his Economy Minister, Paulo Guedes, has all the answers to fix Brazil's slump. Additionally, there is no end to the destruction caused by corruption in Brazil. Some experts believe corruption to be the main reason why Brazil has one of the world's largest wealth inequality gaps. Political corruption robs government coffers of desperately needed funds for education and infrastructure, in addition to creating an atmosphere that encourages everyday citizens to underreport income and engage in the shadow economy, thereby sidestepping tax collectors and regulators. "Why should I be honest about reporting my income when nobody else is? The politicians are only going to steal the tax money anyway," one Brazilian doctor told me. While Bolsonaro has promised a housecleaning of corrupt officials, this is a cry Brazilians have heard from every previous administration. In only the first half-year of his presidency, he has made several missteps, such as nominating one of his sons to be the new ambassador to the U.S., despite the congressman's lack of diplomatic credentials. A June poll found that 51 percent of Brazilians now lack confidence in Bolsonaro's leadership. Just this week, Brazil issued regulations that open a fast-track to deport foreigners who are dangerous or have violated the constitution. The rules published on July 26 by Justice Minister Sérgio Moro define a dangerous person as anyone associated with terrorism or organized crime, in addition to football fans with a violent history. Journalists noted that this new regulation had coincidental timing for an American journalist who has come under fire from Moro for publishing private communications of Moro's. Nevertheless, despite overselling his leadership skills, Bolsonaro has made some economic progress. With the help of congressional leader Rodrigo Maia, a bill is moving forward in congress for the restructuring of Brazil's generous pension system. Most Brazilians recognize the long-term value of such a change, which can save the government billions of dollars over the next decade. At merely the possibility of pension reform, outside investors have responded positively, and the São Paulo stock exchange has performed brilliantly, reaching an all-time high earlier this month. In efforts to boost the economy, Bolsonaro and Paulo Guedes have taken the short-term approach advocated by the Chicago school of economics championed by Milton Friedman, who claimed the key to boosting a slugging economy was to cut government spending. Unfortunately many economists, such as Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman, disagree with this approach. They believe the most effective way to revive a slow economy is exactly the opposite, to spend more money not less. They say the government should be investing money in education and infrastructure projects, which can help put people back to work. Bolsonaro/Guedes have also talked about reducing business bureaucracy and revising the absurdly complex Brazilian tax system, which inhibits foreign and domestic business investment. It remains to be seen whether Bolsonaro has the political acumen to tackle this Godzilla-sized issue. Should Bolsonaro find a way to reform the tax system, the pension system, and curb the most egregious villains of political bribery and kickbacks – a tall order – his efforts could indeed show strong economic results in time for the next election in 2022. Meanwhile, some prominent leaders have already lost faith in Bolsonaro's efforts. The veteran of political/economic affairs, Joaquim Levy, has parted company with the president after being appointed head of the government's powerful development bank, BNDES. Levy and Bolsonaro butted heads over an appointment Levy made of a former employee of Lula's. When neither man refused to back down, Levy resigned his position at BNDES. Many observers believe Bolsonaro's biggest misstep has been his short-term approach to fixing the economy by loosening the laws protecting the Amazon rainforest. He and Guedes believe that by opening up more of the Amazon to logging, mining, and farming, we will see immediate economic stimulation. On July 28, the lead article of The New York Times detailed the vastly increased deforestation in the Amazon taking place under Bolsonaro's leadership. Environmental experts argue that the economic benefits of increased logging and mining in the Amazon are microscopic compared to the long-term damage to the environment. After pressure from European leaders at the recent G-20 meeting to do more to protect the world's largest rainforest, Bolsonaro echoed a patriotic response demanding that no one has the right to an opinion about the Amazon except Brazilians. In retaliation to worldwide criticism, Bolsonaro threatened to follow Trump's example and pull out of the Paris climate accord; however, Bolsonaro was persuaded by cooler heads to retract his threat. To prove who was in control of Brazil's Amazon region, he appointed a federal police officer with strong ties to agribusiness as head of FUNAI, the country's indigenous agency. In a further insult to the world's environmental leaders, not to mention common sense, Paulo Guedes held a news conference on July 25 in Manaus, the largest city in the rainforest, where he declared that since the Amazon forest is known for being the "lungs" of the world, Brazil should charge other countries for all the oxygen the forest produces. Bolsonaro/Guedes also have promised to finish paving BR-319, a controversial highway that cuts through the Amazon forest, linking Manaus to the state of Rondônia and the rest of the country. Inaugurated in 1976, BR-319 was abandoned by federal governments in the 1980s and again in the 1990s as far too costly and risky. Environmentalists believe the highway's completion will seal a death knoll on many indigenous populations by vastly facilitating the growth of the logging and mining industries. Several dozen heavily armed miners dressed in military fatigues invaded a Wajãpi village recently in the state of Amapá near the border of French Guiana and fatally stabbed one of the community's leaders. While Brazil's environmental protection policies are desperately lacking these days, not all the news here was bad. On the opening day of the 2019 Pan America Games in Lima, Peru, Brazilian Luisa Baptista, swam, biked, and ran her way to the gold medal in the women's triathlon. The silver medal went to Vittoria Lopes, another Brazilian. B. Michael Rubin is an American writer living in Brazil.

Brazil Has No Exemplary Past or Present. But What Lies Ahead for the Country?

For years, experts have debated what separates a developing country from a developed one. ...

secular state cartoon

Brazil’s Austerity and a Turn to the Right Restrict Women’s Reproductive Rights

  Late last year, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the Zika virus ...

Brazilian president Michel Temer

Exhausted and Dazed to Act, Brazilians Might Just Keep a Corrupt President

Brazil’s president faces criminal charges and 2% approval rating – but here’s how he ...

Brazil: Get Lula! Now! Or Else…

The interminable, ghastly telenovela aiming at turning Brazil, the seventh-largest economy in the world, ...

Brazilian president Michel Temer

Brazil President Falls to an Improbable Low in Popularity: 2%

Just when it seems impossible for Brazilian President Michel Temer’s approval rating to get ...