Brazil has a reputation in Britain as being a youthful nation of lively people, the footballing superpower, and one that is fast becoming a major economic power. And as far as national reputations go, this seems to be accurate.
Brazil’s Workers Party government has often been promoted as an example of a centre-left regime that can look after its citizens without the proactive anti-Americanism and dodgy personality cult that is said to exist in Venezuela. Unfortunately, the truth isn’t that simple. In order for a democratic and left wing state outside the West to be acceptable to the Anglo-American bloc, they must be so economically liberal that ‘our’ multinationals can still ride roughshod over their environment and workforce. In short, they can call themselves socialists as long as they are not in practice left-wing.
The massive protests that have emerged in Brazil are an indicator that the public have grown impatient with the unfulfilled promise of the Workers Party, which has had a decade in office to create a fairer, modern society. And I can think of no better way of the protestors achieving their aims: the Workers Party doesn’t like to be reminded of its selling out to neo-liberalism. However, they remain true enough to their original ideals to see that their policies like spending £13 billiion on hosting a bunch of football games (I don’t know or care what the competition is called) while schools, hospitals and railways crumble is in fact shameful. The President has offered to meet with protest leaders to plan a programme of hospital and transport improvements; freezing public transport fares (the original cause of the protests); and to hold a referendum on political reform. It looks like these offers will not satisfy the 75% of Brazilians who back the protestors. Why would that be?
We are witnessing the growth in Brazil of generalised disapproval of an inequitable distribution of power and opportunity. Much like with the Occupy protests, we see people who have run out of patience with corruption and social immobility. The difference is that Brazil has a government that is minded to meet their requests. Over here, another election cycle or two is needed to force wholesale reform. The flawed notions of ‘global competitiveness’ and ‘businesses should come first’ still carry weight here- but elsewhere idealism is still acceptable in politics. That’s healthy: things will only change with effort, and people will only strive to create a better future if they consider that a realistic concept.
I hope that in Brazil we are about to witness representative democracy at its best: the people speaking and their government working in partnership with them to meet their goals, not those of lobbyists and foriegn powers. But only time will tell if that dream comes to fruition.
