Brazil's political debate is "childish", says researcher
Professor Esther Solano
Brazil lives days of fierce temper and, in the current context, the political debate became superficial, according to researcher Esther Solano, International Relations professor at the Federal University of São Paulo (UNIFESP). For Solano, researching demonstrations in Brazil since June 2013 protests, the current acts holding the anticorruption flag are polarized in a way that became harmful. "Currently there is a greater burst of anger, polarization, and the speech content is very emotional, with little political strength and very few arguments. A speech precluding the possibility of opening dialogues," she said.
According to the professor, the protesters have the tendency, because remaining restricted to their "ideological ghettos" in social networks (biggest channel of mobilization nowadays), for not having a critical view of the political situation and creating an image of heroes and villains within the political game. "Political debate is no longer a debate of ideas, it is almost a moral debate between good and evil, between symbolic figures, heroes... a very childish debate," she explained.
Esther Solano talked to Portal EBC on the same day that former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva—one of the main targets of protests—was sworn in as chief of staff. She talks about Lula's possible strengthening, in case he can run the office, and also about the political opposition arising as an option to protesters who have taken to the streets, like Jair Bolsonaro and even Aécio Neves, who was booed on March 13th protest.
Portal EBC: Has the profile of people who take to the streets against the government been predominantly the same since 2015?
Esther Solano: The protesters' profile has remained quite similar during this period. Since last year's first demonstration to the latest, which was the largest, [the profile] has not changed. People are white, from upper middle class, at an advanced age. We can see that the organizers speak for a very defined profile, and they have in fact no interest or are unable to add other protesters' group. Their speech does not gather other social groups. We have reported a feeling against the Workers' Party (PT) in the periphery and there are people there who go to the protests. But for them, Avenida Paulista is somehow another world; it is physically and symbolically too far from them.
Portal EBC: What is the difference between the latest protests and June 2013 protests?
Esther Solano: There is a similar aspect, which is the collective catharsis. A moment in which civil society is frenzied, with everyone willing to take to the streets. It seems that people do not have much time to politically reflect on the situation; everyone lives a moment of collective euphoria, sharing a lot on internet, etc. However, there are many different aspects [between both protests]. In June 2013 more heterogeneous people took to the streets during protests and, currently, we see a polarized society, divided and not open to dialogue. We have the pro-impeachment group and the pro-Lula and Rousseff group, and this was not so intense in 2013. Organizers, for political or parties' issues, perhaps, have learned to link the dissatisfaction feeling and the anti-corruption flag to the feeling against Lula and Rousseff.
A large part of protesters are dissatisfied with the entire political system, even with the Brazilian Social Democracy Party (“PSDB”), and the Brazilian Democratic Movement Party (“PMDB”), but in recent protesters the dissatisfaction with the PT has prevailed. Civil society is very polarized and the anger seen in recent protests was not reported in June 2013. Back there they held an anti-corruption flag, for a political change, but today there is a much greater anger, polarization, and the speech's content is very emotional, with little political strength and very few arguments. A speech precluding the possibility of opening dialogues.
Portal EBC: Social networks have been a space for mobilization and debate. How do they impact this situation?
Esther Solano: On the one hand, social networks have a huge political mobilization impact. But they have a downside that is precisely the increasing simplification of the political debate. A lot of superficial information is rapidly shared: On Facebook, for example, no one reads the stories in detail; everyone shares headlines without really getting informed or checking whether they are true or just rumors. People share this and that, and do not spend any time to really reflect upon the situation. Information collected on politics there is very precarious. There are ideological ghettos in social networks, because our friends there are usually those who think in accordance with us. So instead of debating and exchanging ideas, you end up stuck to your own ideas, going in the wave of those who think like you, and not widely debating. And when there is discussion, they are very heated. Unfortunately, the social network is a political platform, but it has this characteristic: impoverishes the content of debate and makes it very polarized.
Portal EBC: And does this [characteristic] tend to feed the emotional content of speeches?
Esther Solano: Institutions are severely weak and we are hit by a very acute democratic crisis at the moment. Most people discredit the Congress daily operation and feel irritated and frustrated: they feel cheated. When institutions are so discredited, we may have a content that is not so much on political program, on proposals, not a rational or argumentative content, and it becomes much more emotional, angry. Then the characters show up. For that reason, we have polarized figures as well. There are those who think of [judge] Sérgio Moro as the country's savior, the hero, and end up putting him above good and evil, and those who Lula and also see him as a superman. Political debate is no longer a debate of ideas; it is almost a moral debate between good and evil, between symbolic figures, heroes... a very childish debate.
Portal EBC: Does Lula's swearing in as minister tend to strengthen the polarization?
Esther Solano: For now yes, because the thought is 'Moro against Lula' and 'Lula against Moro'. Rousseff seems also to have impersonated some of this debate, but watching protesters and their banners, there is still this fight of "good against evil". If Moro in Operation Car Wash fails to provide conclusive evidence against Lula, if the suspension of his swearing in as chief of staff is not accepted and Lula is allowed to continue in politics, he will catch some breath because then Lula's image as a persecuted, a victim will be reinforced and law's image will be politicized. Let's see how the events unfold, because Lula is a figure rich of symbolism. So, depending on what happens next, he can reinforce an image of myth.
Portal EBC: Is there a conflict in the critical analysis of protesters about what is legal or not? For example, can the release of conversations tapped by Operation Car Wash affect the unfolding events?
Esther Solano: A Justice that is politicized and a media circus loses its character of Justice, then the “Car Wash” game played with the press is very dangerous, in my opinion. One of the characteristics of Justice is exactly its impartiality, and when there is a media circus, political manipulation can easily happen. Justice also needs to be largely responsible; then Moro, by releasing the tapped conversations, has flared the temper of society. For me this was obviously a mistake. On the other hand, the ers of Lula and Rousseff also cannot criticize them. So there are really two polarized sides and no one considers the arguments of each other. In this context, the courts have to act with more responsibility and caution, which in the current situation is unfortunately far from happening.
Portal EBC: In your surveys in São Paulo, is it possible to name politicians who would have strength in case of new elections?
Esther Solano: Among the PSDB candidates, Aécio Neves is being poorly evaluated; Alckmin and José Serra are a little better evaluated. But those are not thorough evaluations, because São Paulo is almost a PSDB's fiefdom, where most votes are for Neves or Alckmin. Great part of PSDB voters took to the streets, and even though they also suspect of Alckmin, Neves, and Serra, they would continue voting for them.
Another part [of voters] can opt to be more aggressive, choosing candidates like Jair Bolsonaro, for example, who was applauded on March 13, and that many people consider to be the only honest politician in Brazil. He criticizes everything, always adopts a position, and is taken as an honest person. We evaluated Marina Silva as well, and she does not projects the image of being involved in corruption, of being contaminated by politics, but she lacks precisely defending a position, contrasting with Bolsonaro. She always remains broadly neutral, does not fiercely defend anything. What people may want now is a person who is not afraid of adopting a stance, of speaking. If he decided to stand as a candidate, Moro, for example, is now raising a very large political capital.
Translated by Amarílis Anchieta
Fonte: Brazil's political debate is "childish", says researcher
