Brazil: a little flu with unforeseen human and political consequences
Fernando Romero Wimer[1]
The national context
On February 26, 2020, when knowledge of the global spread of the novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 and its disease, Covid-19) had already been circulating for about two months, the first positive case was confirmed in Brazil; it would also be the first in Latin America. In the preceding days, this South American country had already raised its security alert from level 2 (imminent danger) to level 3 (national public health emergency). Health Minister Luiz Henrique Mandetta stated:Now let's see how this virus will behave in a tropical country during the summer".
At that time, according to data from the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE), unemployment in Brazil had risen to 11,6%, with 12.300.000 unemployed and 38 million people working in the informal sector. Furthermore, the wealthiest 10% of the population controlled 40% of the income.
Following the approval of pension reform and the advancement of public sector cuts and privatizations, the government's new objective shifted to modifying the tax system, promoting regressive changes. The proposed new structure—under the guise of simplification and debureaucratization—promotes tax exemptions on profits and dividends, and the creation of a federal value-added tax. Thus, the reform promoted by the government is a timid attempt to combat the impact of taxation on workers and excludes the debate on tax fairness (the impact of taxes on large fortunes).
A timeline of the presidential reaction
On March 9, in the United States, President Jair Messias Bolsonaro claimed that the global market crash—which had caused Petrobras's stock to plummet and the São Paulo Stock Exchange to close with a 12% drop—was due to the Coronavirus epidemic being “overblown.” On March 11, the World Health Organization (WHO)—facing a health crisis affecting all five continents—declared the disease a “pandemic.”
On March 15, in Brasília and other cities, rallies were held in support of the president—despite being suspended by the organizers—with calls for the closure of the National Congress and the highest court (Supreme Federal Court (STF)). The signs carried by supporters called for military intervention and a repeat of Institutional Act No. 5.[2]The president himself participated in the rallies in Brasilia, even while under suspicion of having contracted COVID-19.
On March 18, Congressman Eduardo Bolsonaro (Social Liberal Party), the president's son, used the expression "Chinese virus" (similar to the one used by Donald Trump) on Twitter to refer to the disease. In the post, he compared China's stance to that of the Soviet Union in the face of the Chernobyl disaster. “Once again, the dictatorship chose to hide something serious rather than expose it and risk political fallout, even though doing so would save countless lives. China is to blame, and freedom is the solution.”The message against Brazil's main trading partner was disapproved of by Rodrigo Maia (President of the Chamber of Deputies), the Chinese Embassy in Brazil, Vice President Hamilton Mourão, and Agriculture Minister Tereza Cristina Corrêa Da Costa Dias, among others. The situation led to a phone call between Jair Bolsonaro and Chinese President Xi Jinping to reaffirm diplomatic and economic relations between the two nations.
On March 24, Bolsonaro, speaking on national radio and television, called for a return to normalcy, urging the reopening of schools and businesses. He dismissed the pandemic as a "little flu" and accused the press of exaggeration. That night, the eighth consecutive pot-banging protest took place in the country's major cities.
On March 26, the “Brazil Can’t Stop” campaign began circulating on the social media accounts of the president’s sons, gaining the support of numerous business leaders and religious figures. The campaign advocated for so-called “vertical isolation,” in which only at-risk groups, such as those over 60 and immunocompromised individuals, would be subject to social distancing measures.[3]
On March 27, in different parts of the country, spurred on by the presidential address, numerous business owners and entrepreneurs organized various car caravans, demanding the reopening of economic activities and an end to social distancing measures. Most governors and the presidents of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate condemned these initiatives.
Under pressure from legal measures, the national government reversed its campaign promoting the return to activities[4] and the demonstrations had to be abandoned.
On March 31, faced with growing public disapproval, media pressure through the Globo network, and the distancing of figures from his immediate circle and allied sectors, Bolsonaro changed the tone and orientation of his discourse. After having joked about the disease days earlier and called the situation “hysteria” and “fantasy,” that night he defined it as the “greatest challenge of our generationOn April 1st, it was reported that the president signed the subsidy of 600 reais (approximately US$110) for informal workers.
Political realignments at the top
The arrival of the coronavirus pandemic accelerated the political timeline. Leading politicians on the Brazilian right have begun to distance themselves from their alignment with the president.
In February, two potential presidential candidates, the governor of São Paulo state, João Doria, and the governor of Rio de Janeiro, Wilson Witzel, who came to power in 2018 with the support of Bolsonaro's movement, further distanced themselves from the president. Both signed a letter along with 20 other governors questioning the president's lack of contribution to the economy. “evolution of democracy” by promoting protests against the National Congress. In early March, Doria and Witzel moved closer together to isolate the Rio de Janeiro mayoral candidate who is closest to the presidency. On March 31, after Bolsonaro strolled through the streets of Brasilia on Sunday the 29th, Doria stated that the president “It does not properly guide the population."And Witzel argued that the president could be tried for..."crimes against humanity".
Eduardo Bolsonaro's questioning of China prompted a counter-position from agribusiness leaders. On March 19, the Agricultural Parliamentary Front—the so-called "rural caucus" (comprised of 245 deputies and 40 senators)—issued a statement asserting that China “He is a long-time partner with whom we have an excellent business and friendly relationship.” and that “Isolated demonstrations do not represent the sentiment of a nation or any sectorThe Brazil-China Parliamentary Front (comprised of 225 legislators) also questioned the president's son's statements.
The presidential address on the evening of March 24, 2020, led to a wave of criticism from political figures. João Amoêdo, leader of the Novo Party, who supported Bolsonaro in the second round of the 2018 elections, stated hours later in Twitter that the speech was “unacceptable"and that the head of state"He should present a plan, show the seriousness of the situation, demonstrate composure, or resign from his position.That same night, the President of the Senate, Davi Alcolumbre, agreed that the speech was "grave" and that the country needed “a serious leader”.
Another significant break with Bolsonaro's policies was the departure of the governor of Goiás, physician Ronaldo Caiado. This occurred on March 25, after the president questioned the governors' decisions and the social distancing recommendations issued by health authorities.
That same day, former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso—a critic of Bolsonaro—stated on social media that:This is a serious moment; it's not appropriate to politicize it, but opposing the infectious disease specialists goes too far. If he doesn't keep quiet, he's preparing his own end. And his end is better than that of the entire nation.
The day after the speech that requested the "back to normal"Twenty-six governors (out of a total of 27) participated in a teleconference meeting with Rodrigo Maia to coordinate a federal action plan against COVID-19. The president was expressly receiving widespread disapproval from the state leaders.
Following the president's repeated questioning of the measures taken by his own health minister, Minister Mandetta[5]Paulo Guedes (Minister of Economy) and Sergio Moro (Minister of Justice) presented themselves as aligned against Bolsonaro's attitudes and rhetoric. Moro stated that:“The responsibility for providing guidance on COVID-19 lies with the Ministry of Health.”, and Guedes proposed:“As an economist, I would like us to be able to maintain production and return to normal as quickly as possible. As a citizen, following the advice of healthcare professionals, I prefer to stay home.”On March 31, they were to announce emergency measures to combat the spread of the disease. That same night, Bolsonaro changed the tone of his speech, acknowledging the seriousness of the situation.
That same day, another front against Bolsonaro's policies gained strength in the Supreme Federal Court (STF). Marco Aurélio Mello, one of the Supreme Court's justices, ordered the Attorney General's Office to analyze the complaint alleging that Bolsonaro, through his actions, violated the public authority's mandate to prevent the introduction or spread of a contagious disease. On April 1, Alexandre de Moraes, another STF justice, gave the president 48 hours to report on the measures adopted to combat the spread of the novel coronavirus.
The left versus Bolsonaro and the pandemic
On March 19, former President Luiz Inácio “Lula” Da Silva stated thatFirst we save the people, then the economy.”He defended social distancing and questioned the government's lack of guidance to the population.
On March 30, Fernando Haddad, Tarso Genro and Gleisi Hoffmann (Workers' Party), Ciro Gomes (Democratic Labor Party), Flávio Dino and Manuela d'Ávila (Communist Party of Brazil) and Guilherme Boulos (Socialism and Liberty Party), among other personalities, signed a joint statement in which they maintained that:
“Bolsonaro cannot continue governing Brazil and facing this crisis, which jeopardizes both health and the economy. He commits crimes, spreads misinformation, lies, and foments chaos, exploiting the desperation of the most vulnerable population. (…) Bolsonaro is more than a political problem; he has become a public health problem. Bolsonaro lacks greatness. He should resign, which would be the least costly gesture to allow for a democratic solution for the country. He urgently needs to be restrained and held accountable for the crimes he is committing against our people.”
Looking ahead, it is worth considering both the reconfigurations of the political landscape on the right and the ability of the Brazilian left to unite its forces.
In most parts of the country, the masses of poor peasants, Indigenous peoples, and numerous segments of the rural and urban proletariat are seeing their conditions of inequality, lack of food, medicine, and housing infrastructure worsen. The crisis is already being exploited by capital for an offensive involving renegotiation of labor contracts, wage reductions, and layoffs. As the pandemic progresses, the contradictions between the need to contain the disease and the reproduction of daily life for the masses will intensify.
So far, even though reality is becoming blurred, the circumstances do not suggest that the left will find a popular solution to the crisis. The Brazilian political landscape is emerging with possibilities for different alternatives within the right-wing forces. In any case, it is clear that the scenario is unpredictable, especially in terms of the human cost.[6] such as its effects on the economy and politics.
[1]Doctor of History and Master in Development and Territorial Management. Director of Interdisciplinary Group of Studies and Research on Transnational Capitals, State, Dominant Classes and Conflict in Latin America and the Caribbean (GIEPTALC) from Brazil and from Collective for Social Studies and Research (CEISO)Argentina. Professor at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Federal University for Latin American Integration (UNILA)Brazil. This article is a variation of the version published in: https://www.acercandonoscultura.com.ar/
See article:
[2] Decree issued by the Brazilian military dictatorship in 1968 that gave extraordinary powers to the president and suspended constitutional guarantees.
[3] As we have already pointed out: “With capitalist interests in control, COVID-19 emerges as a horrifying death sentence for the elderly. When Bolsonaro, Trump, Johnson, and others resist quarantines, they argue that the virus' lethality is concentrated in the over-60 age group. In other words, there would be no significant impact on the active workforce, but rather on the inactive population. The human value of the elderly is thus placed at odds with their value to capital.” See: ROMERO WIMER, F. “War and the Coronavirus: From Metaphor to the Deepening of Authoritarian Society,” in: WalkingMarch 30, 2020. Available at: https://www.marcha.org.ar/la-guerra-y-el-nuevo-coronavirus-de-la-metafora-la-profundizacion-de-la-sociedad-autoritaria/
[4] The Special Secretariat of Communication of the Presidency publicized the campaign on its social networks, then these publications were deleted on Saturday morning, March 28.
[5] The day after the president's March 24th address, Mandetta appeared hesitant and even went so far as to claim—in support of Bolsonaro—that some of the governors' decisions had been hasty. However, days later, with the balance of power in the government reshaped, he managed to ensure that the social distancing measures remained in place.
[6]As of April 2, at the time of writing, Brazil topped the Latin American ranking with 7.910 confirmed positive cases and 299 deaths from COVID-19.
[+] Thinking about the pandemic
If you would like to receive more information about CLACSO's training programs:
[widget id=”custom_html-57″]
to our email lists.
