The minister and offshore: contestation of the note released by the defense of Guedes - 10/06/2021

Known that those who hope for the emergence of a name that embodies the “third way” — whatever that means — have certain certainties that guide their actions and speeches. One: “As soon as the dispute starts in earnest, Lula will get tangled up in the accusations that opponents will make against the PT.” The other: “Jair Bolsonaro will dehydrate even more, and the conservative electorate will look for an alternative to try to defeat the former president”.

These two theses are at the root of a trap that no candidate for third way candidate has managed to get out of so far: the invitation to vote for a “neither-nor” name. Let’s think about both.

What is there to say against Lula and against the PT that has not yet been said and priced by the electorate? A president affiliated with the legend was impeached, and Lula himself spent 580 days in jail. If court-ordered convictions are political arguments, so are deliverances. But there is more.

In October of next year, the PT will have completed six years away from the Presidency of the Republic. Enough time for an invitation to be made to the electorate, especially the poorest: “During this period, after the fall of the PT, did your life improve or deteriorate?” I understand that the polls that today give Lula a large advantage register the answer to that question.

Also on the left, it should be noted, there are those who are not concerned with the efficiency of the ruler. There are those who vote for the PT, regardless of the quality of the management that has been or promised. And an even bigger group stays with Lula and that’s it. Would not accept another name. The advantage that the PT members have today, however, goes beyond ideological adherence or linked to the leader’s charisma. Just look at the choices of the very poor, the poor, and the almost affluent. Agree: it will be difficult to place the responsibility for inflation, unemployment, low growth on the petistas’ backs…

The cohesive force of Bolsonaro’s electorate is mainly ideological. With the exception of some strata of the elite that actually benefited by the government – and there are -, I doubt that anyone will endorse the name of the current president because he has actually benefited from the quality of his administration.

I may find it hateful, but it is a fact that millions of Brazilians identify with their war on the contemporary world and on civilizing values. They think — and it is an evil of democracies everywhere — that the evils of the world result from what they understand to be the degradation of customs and so-called communist agendas. In Brazil, this translates into an aversion to environmentalism and the rights of indigenous peoples, quilombolas, the homeless, the landless…

How big is this electorate? It is very likely that crazy reactionarism mobilizes something around 15%. With the circumstantial adhesions to Bolsonaro due to his support for agendas linked to some professional segments, it is not easy to make the president fall below 20%.

I try to show, and I have no hope that the candidates for candidates will agree, that when you preach “neither Lula nor Bolsonaro”, what you achieve is to win the adhesion of those who already are… “neither-nor” . An effort is made to reiterate, not expand the electorate. And yet: there is no single way of being neither one nor the other. As one tries to build a name from exclusions, hardly a single candidate could be the sum of these modes.

For the rest, agree: I can’t see Ciro Gomes giving up his postulation to endorse any of the names on his right. Even if he did, I don’t think his constituency would follow him. Today, few would bet that there will be only one name — or two — to dispute this place that is pure mental construction: “neither Lula nor Bolsonaro”.

Furthermore, errors are accumulating.

There is certainly another word to designate what was seen this Sunday in the PSDB previews. They all have to be synonymous with “embarrassment”. The positive effects of a possible early campaign were lost. The process has been counterproductive. Parties are never monolithic blocs, it is true, and the toucans have their differences. But what was seen is a risk of fracture.

Politics doesn’t always meet the empire of logic, I know. But I’m logical—one reason, among many, why I would never engage in such an activity. And logic tells me that the PSDB should have the epithet “The Vaccine Party”. Instead… It so happens that my consideration would obviously imply a choice that would exclude internal dispute. Toucans are wasting their greatest asset. “Ah, but João Doria, with his style…” Well, dear and dear, that’s it with the toucans. And I have already written that, in this confrontation, I am a supporter of adverbs.

The clash, for now, only excites those who have taken a side in the internal war. The damage, to a certain extent, ends up debited from the account of, if you will allow me, the “third way thesis”. Why? Because, of course!, this is all irrelevant for Lula of the PT — who is reaping the laurels of a hugely successful tour of Europe — and also for Bolsonaro. The reasons are listed above.

Or could anyone convince me, or anyone else, that this Sunday’s dolly is attractive even to the “neither-nor” voter? And for the electorate, then, who have already chosen Lula or Bolsonaro, but could they change? Given what has been seen, it is worth asking: “Why would they do that?” All presidential candidates, I note, should ask this question.

The repentant right and far right, who voted for Bolsonaro and feel betrayed — in some cases, because the current president was not reactionary enough — try to make Sergio Moro “the guy” who, at first, will remove the current president from the second round and, later, wage the holy war against Lula.

Let’s see what the polls will point out. The former judge and former minister had a positive news cycle in the professional press that did not include any of the pre-candidates. He attended the debate with the laundry agenda, to which he added the creation of an exceptional court. To judge corrupt, of course!

He made such a proposal in his speech of affiliation to Podemos and also in an article for a digital magazine. As the democratic world is unaware of the strovenga, it decided to set as a successful example none other than the government of Ukraine, an amalgamation of right-wing extremists and nationalists who do not lack even currents identified with neo-Nazism. The fact that Vladimir Putin is hostile to them does not make them good.

Moro seeks to unseat Bolsonaro by baiting right-wing extremists with the so-called anti-corruption agenda and with a hatred of politics – the same one who elected his former boss -, but he does not feel comfortable defending the entire decalogue of the reactionaries because he would lose the sympathy of sectors engaged of the press. It should be remembered that to attract bozolandia, it takes more than a hatred of institutional politics. It is also necessary to harass the LGBTQIA+ community, quilombolas, indigenous peoples, feminists with a scrawl on their belts…

I’m not sure I see out there that Bolsonaro will be dehydrated to the point where he won’t play in the second round. And I also don’t think it will be easy to try to revive the heat of the accusations that weighed against the PT. Starting from these premises is, in its own way, making politics as a hostage to what they hardly call “polarization”.

“And Ciro, Reinaldo?”

Yes, he could even be the “tertius” in the race. But, for that to happen, sectors of the right would have to agree with his reading of what he considers to be the follies of the economy – and his macroeconomic postulates are not that different from those of the PT.

It turns out that “the rights” do not agree. It is no secret that many so-called “conservatives” believe that it would be easier to negotiate with Lula than with Ciro.

This Sunday I saw the PSDB struggling and, in practice, making light of what could be one of the most active gods: the vaccine.

I notice that Moro is trying to behave, once again, as a kidnapper of politics — a role he has played since 2014. After all, it’s not hard to remember that, by acting outside the rules of the game, the now pre-candidate of Podemos was, yes, a character in Lula’s downfall, but also his resurrection. If he had behaved like a judge, not a politician, perhaps the PT would not have gone to jail — since he was convicted without evidence — but it is worth speculating: would he be leading the polls?

Neither Lula nor Bolsonaro? Back to the question, “Why would voters do this?”

Leave a Reply