Murilo Oliveira
Brazil, March 17, 2024.
The great panacea in times of war, whether conventional or biological, is the resurgence of national governance models with security policies increasingly tending towards autocracy and a single party.
More evidently, we are generally concerned that social policies are consistent and have continuity, in different sectors of the left, which seek to cover broad disadvantaged sectors of society and many minorities. While the demand for public security seems to be central only to the right, but both things largely result in the same thing, an institutional engineering always tending towards autocracy and a single party.
Municipally today, at this point in the events in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, with nuances, it can be said that we tend to adopt in the consolidated discourses that public security policy is and should be central, regardless of whether some believe in regular forces crime repression, or others in parastatal forces. Basically, disputes that all the time talk about the hypothesis of institutional engineers who compete in São Paulo, for example, for the third largest public budget in the country.
The phenomenon is necessarily not as local as it appears to us, it is possible to see examples that range from the one much discussed in the Brazilian press: Russia today, to the one almost not remembered very clearly in terms of its internal politics and repression: China, passing in places like Venezuela or El Salvador, although for example Venezuela seems to us to be a left-wing place, and El Salvador is a right-wing place, we do not have democracy as we have intended in recent decades in Brazil in any of these places.
Even so, and that said, the need for consistent and continuous social policies is so eloquent among all Brazilians that this, for example, authorizes a constant refusal of this or that other less capable party group. It is the center of the discourse of the Brazilian left today, to say that there are not so many nor so capable politicians who can sustain a policy that favors the most disadvantaged and the broadest minorities, that one can choose between different political groups. More than that, it becomes a persecutory speech by various oppositions without the slightest condition for managing social inequalities in our country, which tends, in most cases, to an incredible tolerance for parastate power, or a blatant justification of crime rates in the country. country, from such great inequality. It is a mantra of legal parallelism, and why not say an order of the day of constant persecution of opposition, and even of those who in some way try to align themselves alongside regular State forces.
In bold letters, there are large groups in Brazil today, including intellectuals and artists, who believe that no citizen, based on the deductive process they operate, that we have political leaders who are absolutely incompetent and incomprehensible towards the most disadvantaged and large minorities, who are they refuse to align themselves in a way that offers popular support and approval to police forces, whatever they may be. It is absolutely forbidden for broad sectors of the left, which I repeat range from intellectuals to artists, to be understanding of the regular state activity of public security forces. At the same time, the central motivator for believing in certain leftist leaders at this point is no longer based on their capacity for state management, but fundamentally on the belief that, arising from this most adverse reality, and obtaining broad support from a parastate power , or in other words, achieving great success in a parallel legal universe, this qualifies them to offer the entire population more peace and security.
There should not be a person surprised, for example, to think that this reaches the point of madness, when, for example, a former federal delegate and general director of the country’s intelligence agency, faced with this speech, which I have just expressed, that what matters most is the success in the parallel legal universe, make this one appear to be the antipode of that one, even if everyone’s underlying desire is the same.
I will go further, the march of autocracy and a single party comes with such great force and constant that a strong speech in defense of democracy is calmly accompanied by a great persecution of opposing political groups. It is not surprising that at the same time as people talk about defending democracy, they very often hear the defense of the extinction of this or that party group, today in Brazil. It is a march, to the sound of marching bands across the world, and no less across the global south, of autocracies and a single party.
Where I have been making an inflection since the beginning of this Lula Government, saying one day after another, that throwing the country’s regular security forces into deep discredit, whether the Armed Forces themselves or the police forces, is not enough to lead us to a successful conclusion in this historical moment of humanity. Believing in what, perhaps in bold letters it should say, becomes circumstantial, which is to have a single political party competently carrying out the defense of the most disadvantaged and large minorities, with clearly more consistent social policies, must be irrevocably maintained in power , can, as it necessarily will, make us fall into error. We made the mistake of not reserving the permanent scrutiny of such policies and such political groups by the entire population of the country periodically. Because the entire population of the country is not homogeneous, it finds itself caught up in elementary doubts at all times.
@CoexistenceLaw
Share this content:
