Communiqué clear as spring water

Marcelo Guimarães Lima, Red Forest - Future Paradise II, 2020


Oligopolized communication in Brazil has always been an instrument of coups and dictatorships, guaranteeing the validity and power of influence of anti-people and anti-nation interests in public debate

Due to the so-called globalization, communication in the language of the Uncle Sam (Uncle Sam). Basing myself on the carioca translation school, whose patron is Millor Fernandes, late author of The Cow Went to the Swamp and other very instructive tales (The cow went to the swamp and other very educational stories), I will do everything to ensure that this release does justice to its title and is, in fact, clear like mountain water (clear as water from a mountain spring), and instructive to whom it may concern (to any interested parties), mainly at this moment of negotiations between the party of the popularly elected leader, Lula, and the opportunists of various shades of the centenary, better said, the Jurassic (Jurassic) Brazilian right.

The pressing issue is the handover of the Ministry of Communications to Mr. Sergio Moro. Surely the brilliant strategists of the PT's leading core must have an ace up their sleeves for such a surprising proposal and negotiation and will reveal their brilliant strategy at the same time, defensive and offensive, worthy of a Clausewitz caboclo, in due time and in the right place.

It can only be that, I think, discarding the lack of intelligence, the excessive prudence that opens the doors and invites the opponent to attack, the skepticism beforehand (preceding the facts), lack of experience or, shall we say, excessive timidity, a sad characteristic of the undecided and of those who, on principle, always doubt their own strength. These, no doubt, may charitably deserve some understanding and perhaps solidarity, but never serve as a model for anything.

But while we await the effective fight against the right-ultra-right coup dynamism, which was the target of our (me and the guys, me modestly, of course) efforts in the resistance and in the election of Lula, it would be necessary to remind those involved in the initiative of some questions interesting: never in the history of this country, the (anti) national right, worthy representative of the Brazilian dominant class (Brazil's ruling class), made any lasting concessions to popular forces.

It is enough to remember the succession of coups in the modern history of the country: coup against Getúlio, coup against Jango and the Military Dictatorship, coup against Dilma, arrest of Lula and the managed election of Jair Bolsonaro. In all these episodes, always with the implicit and explicit complicity of a well-known foreign power, the even timid advance of a popular agenda in politics and the economy was the motto for the violent reaction of the nation's rulers (owners of the country). In all these episodes, the initial subversive movements came from right-wing politicians (right-wing politicians) and its associated media: Carlos Lacerda against Getúlio and against Jango, Aécio Neves against the election of Dilma, among others.

If the facts say anything for sure, it is possible to conclude with some certainty that the parties of the (anti) Brazilian right are associations of professional or semi-professional robbers, benches for dealings in the most diverse ways. This was wide open, for those who still had doubts about the subject, by Jair Bolsonaro and his ministers in health, education, the pandemic crisis, privatizations, etc., etc. Never has the modus operandi (from Latin: way of doing things) of the right in Brazilian politics been so scandalously explicit as in the mismanagement of Palhaço Coupista. And the so-called “institutions of the national state” judiciary, police, parliament did not prevent excesses and attacks on public coffers.

The self-glorified Brazilian “big press” passed the cloth until the lack of control and the fascist hallucinations turned against Globo (Globo Network), the official and unofficial command of programmed disinformation in Brazil. Due to the oligopolistic nature of the communications business, upstarts like the Captain of Chaos and his associates were bound to be eliminated sooner or later. And they are, because the expiration date (read: usefulness) of Bolsonarism for the country's owners has already expired.

All this is widely known and difficult to dispute. So some will say that so far this self-titled clear statement (actually a digression ad libitum, to the wandering of ideas) it is raining in the wet. But it is precisely in the wet that we can slip, and it is necessary to insist that the weather is unstable until someone brings one or more umbrellas (umbrellas) to ease our situation.

For popular forces. politics in Brazil is always unsigned land (Latin: unsteady ground). For the right-ultraright continuum it is business as usual (business as usual). Both before the 2016 coup, during the coup governments of Michel Temer and Jair Bolsonaro, and now in what could be thought of as post-coup construction, resumption (?) of democracy and similar designations: business as usual (business above all) for conservative politicians. A sort of convescote between friends and acquaintances to which we weren't invited: me, you, the common people and the common people.

Our role is to watch the show and applaud rehearsed approval when requested, just like the so-called auditorium programs on Brazilian television, true noisy metaphors of our postmodern democracy. Lula is now the commander of a “broad front” that defeated Jair Bolsonaro. Of course, we, the common people, breathe a sigh of relief. But it is equally clear that in the resistance and in the elections, the common people played a fundamental role in the defeat of the fascist camp.

I can't help but remember that anecdote about the goat placed in the living room of the family that lived in conflict. When they finally removed the goat, the family breathed a sigh of relief and reunited! Until when, the anecdote does not say. the return to status quo ante (from Latin: previous state), that is, before the goat, did family relationships really change? A question that is clearly not a question, but, as English speakers say, a rhetorical question (“rhetorical question” or formal, that is, with an already implicit answer, a statement in the form of a question). The question is: who put the Bolsonaro goat in the living room?

Many people contributed to the coup and coup regime of Michel Temer and Jair Bolsonaro. Many who today are part of the “broad front” and claim parts of the state machine, positions, etc. also the Globo (Globo Network) and the so-called mainstream press in general. Everyone wants “their” share of public money. All business as usual, that is, in free translation, the mamata (breast-feeding, or sucking milk for free) which belongs to them by divine right and consecrated tradition since the times of hereditary captaincies.

Oligopolized communication in Brazil, the country of what I designated in a previous text as “structural coup d’état”,[1] it has always been a fundamental instrument of coups and dictatorships, guaranteeing the validity and power of influence of anti-people and anti-nation interests in public debate. And apparently, it should remain so. Our Democrats of the occasion, their scribes and screenwriters are already brainstorming (devising new ideas and strategies for) future coups. The least that could be asked is that we do not make their task easier.

*Marcelo Guimaraes Lima is an artist, researcher, writer and teacher.




The site the earth is round exists thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
Click here and find how

See this link for all articles