I am here posting a comment a made about an article written by my friend Marcos Inhauser, "It is not a Matter of Cents". Perhaps you should read first the article (also posted here in my page) before you read this comment so you can get the context. MARCOS INHAUSER: SATISFIED BUTAPREHENSIVE. It seems that the twenty cents increase in bus fare in São Paulo became the emblem of this popular Brazilian mobilization, without really being so, because the phrase "Not for 20 cents" has become emblematic of this movement as saying the 20 cents increase were the "last drop" that ultimately overflowed the patience of Brazilians. Actually, I think that the 20 cents were the prompting of an opportunity for Brazilians show their dissatisfaction with the present situation. With this perception, Inhauser entitles his reflection on this opportunity using the reference to 20 cents, but in there he explicits (though not in the text) that is rather a civil rights issue, all rights that are in this context being infringed upon or prevented from being enjoyed by the people. The Inhasaurian critic again proves to be interesting, acute and responsible. If I were to give an alternate title to this article of Inhauser, it would be something like: "Satisfied, but apprehensive" because in my opinion is through this sense of pride and apprehension that my friend Marcos Inhauser represents the thinking of perhaps millions of other Brazilians that didn’t come to the streets and have thoughts somewhat paradox about this popular manifestation in Brazil: by one hand feeling proud, and, by another hand, apprehensive of how dangerous it can become if continues escalating. The reason for satisfaction Inhauser with this popular mobilization is not only because the people finally woke up from a social-political lethargy of decades: is also for the level of citizenship counciousness that it reflects, being a genuine expression from the people, and not of parties and unions, he says-- reflecting the general dissatisfaction with Brazilian parties - the locus of "rotten" politicians. To Inhauser this popular mobilization was possible by the well-known and perhaps expected lack of tact from police in dealing with such movements. He points to two possible causes for such incompetence: lack of experience (over 20 years without demonstrations) and also from inherit the methods of the military dictatorship (violence) in dealing with people. Well, times have changed and I don’t know if was from a sense of solidarity with those attacked and repressed, that more people came to the streets, now counted in millions. I do not believe that the growth of the movement is mainly a reaction to the violence of the authorities against demonstrators. I believe, rather, that more than this, it is the population willing to speak up, to show its dissatisfaction, and clearly telling he authorities and Brazilian parties that Brazil belongs to the People, not to them! Inhauser, with your paramount vision, puts also in this equation the role of the international press, forcing this populist Brazilian government to give attention to the movement, as the demonstration of dissatisfaction to continue to grow, with more impact in the international media, can really damage its plans for the next elections. Perhaps the journalistic international press has been expressed with more content and analysis about this manifestation popular in Brazil, but the television, especially here in the United States, as always, gave little attention to it, reflecting the nature "belly-bottom centered" of the American interest. The CBS television network here in the United States dedicated in their news shows less than 15 seconds to the Brazilian manifestations (which is probably the representative of the other major networks) mostly showing scenes of vandalism and police violence, oblivious to the social magnitude of the movement. Before concluding his reflection, Inhauser, as a responsible social critic, could not fail to express his concern regarding the use of the popular manifestation with social maturity. I see in his the words an Inhauser threading carefully, so he could not be misunderstood as opposed to the movement, but really trying to identify its ultimate quality. Here, we can state some facts by the way of response to his questions, even if these were merely rhetorical: First, it’s difficult to measure the social maturity of a people which for little more than 20 years ago was under the shackles of military dictatorship. We can say that so far the people was enjoying the recovered democracy in the form of free elections ... but now, people seem to be saying that he felt betrayed by their representatives. Second, it is difficult to measure the social maturity of a people which is mostly being manipulated on a populist form by a government that once was believed to be only genuine representative of the masses (PT). Third, the fact that among the complaints is included the popular indignation against spending billions to welcome the Soccer World Cup, while schools and hospitals are delivered to the rats, this fact seems to be indicative of some social maturity.. . The question is whether the people who now manifests against this, will thus demonstrate in the electoral polls tomorrow, or will forget everything in few weeks. At the end of his reflection Inhauser wants to emphasize an agenda that he apparently does not see the demonstrations emphasized enough, a standing against the PEC-37 (a constitution amend proposal) which prohibits the district attorneys and the General Attorney Office to conduct criminal investigations. Perhaps the reason that such a claim is not much present in the demonstrations is due to the corporatist character that the reaction against this proposal has been taking ... Everyone knows the difficulty that lawyers in general have to speak the language of the people, and so, the PEC-37 is more an issue for "experts" than for the popular masses. Here in the United States, the "District Attorney" and "Attorney General Office" has freeway in criminal investigations and it seems that this has been a good thing for the most democratic country in the world. Satisfaction and apprehensiveness seem to be the keynote of this Inhausarian reflection and, in this sense, I believe, is fairly representative of millions of Brazilians who did not come down to the streets. I see Marcos Inhauser, my friend, walking amongst laid eggs in this article, as in many situations life insists on put us on.
Posted on: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 16:43:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015