All the media and political pundits are scrambling to understand how a 20-cent bus fare hike in Brasil turned into a social revolt and brought a million people demonstrating in the streets of cities. Overall, it has become a broad-based mix of interests and people, with polls showing that the majority of Brazilians support the protests. People of all political inclinations have taken to the streets in major cities around the country. The various city authorities have rescinded the fare rises in an attempt to quell protests, but the demonstrations still continue. Broader demands to remove public transportation from the private sector, to fund schools and hospitals, and against the FIFA and corruption in general, among others, keep people in the streets.
The movement originally under the umbrella of the Free Fare Movement is so broad and amorphous that there isn’t a formal list of reform demands being used to petition the State and the President. Brazil has a long history of top-down reforms that have inadequately addressed the profound inequality that divides the country. The mass demonstrations are finally calling attention to issues that cannot be solved by minor changes, indicating things might be different this time. The protests now are to express discontent with a society that has seen its economy and the aspirations of its population grow, while generating a sense that the majority is not seeing the benefits it’s entitled to. The movement’s lack of leadership and coordination is seen by some as a risk factor and by others as an encouraging sign of citizens acting for a better society. This may be a movement of people full of cynicism for politicians but it is also a romantic movement for those who envisage a different type of future.
No-one is quite sure why the protest caught on like it did. In an interview Caio Martins of the Free Fare Movement replied that something had changed in people’s aspirations. “First, because it caught the people’s imagination.” He added, “To talk about the fare hikes is to talk about the situation in the cities, and transportation is an essential element.”
Brazil has among the most expensive public transportation systems in the world, as well as being aggravatingly inefficient. Privatized years ago, the buses get stuck in traffic and take up inordinate amounts of people’s time and money. Demonstrations started in Sao Paulo, the usually staid capital and financial center of the country. There the contrast between the majority of the population and the elite shows in their way of getting around. The rich fly in private helicopters that buzz through the airways over the congested streets below. Some Brazilians are among the richest people in the world, and live a life as if they were in Switzerland but there are also the poorest in the world—the majority that continues to live a life not substantially different from the times of Brasil’s slavery past. A poor person that lives in the sprawling outskirts of São Paulo spends an average of three hours commuting to work every day inside noisy, packed, and expensive buses, subways, and urban trains. Transportation costs in São Paulo are the highest in the world relative to wages. Residents of São Paulo must work ten times as many hours as residents of Buenos Aires to pay for transportation, and more than twice a worker in Paris. With the privatization of the system, drivers lost their benefits, faced reduced compensations, and had their labor unions severely undermined.
The protests reflected the pandering to this privileged few. Brazil’s preparations for the World Cup in 2014 and the Olympics in 2016 have syphoned away billions of dollars of public funds. The billions of dollars spent have rightly angered millions of Brazilians who live without social infrastructure and lack basic public goods. The new mega-stadiums, airports and hotels will not be shared by the masses of the soccer-loving public. They will accommodate an international elite that can afford to pay the high ticket prices for far fewer but more luxury seats. Not only do the poor receive little benefits from this expenditure, but the infrastructure projects have led to displacement of poor families, especially around the stadiums. The in-your-face inequality represented by the corrupt and wealthy soccer federation provoked signs like, “We want schools and healthcare of the same quality that the FIFA bosses have” and, “The World Cup for whom?” The poor are paying a heavy price international sporting events for the elite. The FIFA has demanded the suspension of basic civil liberties for the games and imposed its own rules to monopolize sales and income related to the games as are the IOC for the following Olympic Games.
For the government and business the two things they care deeply about: the millions in foreign revenue that will supposedly pour in during the mega-events and the image of Brazil as a modern, upcoming leader in the BRICS industrial alliance. Police violence against demonstrators in São Paulo at the beginning of the protest triggered nation-wide mass demonstrations with a broad range of demands targeting all forms of social inequality. The state reaction to the movement has brought to the surface 500 years of repressed anger and frustration towards deep inequality. The rich and powerful have maintained their dominance through five centuries of Brazil’s history, managing challenges with a mix of repression and reform. After the backlash against police repression during the early marches, conservatives shifted quickly from repression to co-optation. Subsequently, virtually all the media and the right-wing parties have been in favor of the demonstrators, and attempt to use them to their advantage. There is a threat that reactionary groups could hijack this political moment to weaken the center-left Workers’ Party.
Despite these manipulations, the demands from the streets call for a rupture, and not reform of the old institutions. This is a rare cry. Brazilians finally appear to be tiring of minor cosmetic changes that have brought little benefit.
The present President promises more concessions to achieve class peace. The ex-president Lula endeavoured to shift income distribution to help the poor: more social programs, higher minimum wage, and higher employment rates. This was made possible by a favorable international scenario that allowed him to help the poor without confronting the interests of the rich. Brazil’s huge trade surpluses generated the funds to finance social programs without compromising the gains of the capitalist class . However, the world financial crisis beginning in 2008 undermined the conditions for this scenario. The current President Dilma Rouseff now faces a different challenge. To help the poor, she will have to confront the rich more. With recent cutbacks of government expenditures and low GDP growth rates the dispute between rich and poor becomes increasingly bitter. The poor want more social programmes and more income redistribution and the Dilma administration cannot realistically deliver, despite the pledges to do so.
For the Socialist Party what began as a campaign by what was originally translated in the British media as the "Free Access Movement" we speculate that this is how the socialist revolution may start, with people taking to the streets to demand Free Access to everything (and, then, consolidating this with an election victory.) We also consider the State’s response of offering conciliatory reforms to bribe and divert workers from their objective as the more likely scenario than one of the Iron Heel and totalitarian suppression.
Adapted from here and here
The movement originally under the umbrella of the Free Fare Movement is so broad and amorphous that there isn’t a formal list of reform demands being used to petition the State and the President. Brazil has a long history of top-down reforms that have inadequately addressed the profound inequality that divides the country. The mass demonstrations are finally calling attention to issues that cannot be solved by minor changes, indicating things might be different this time. The protests now are to express discontent with a society that has seen its economy and the aspirations of its population grow, while generating a sense that the majority is not seeing the benefits it’s entitled to. The movement’s lack of leadership and coordination is seen by some as a risk factor and by others as an encouraging sign of citizens acting for a better society. This may be a movement of people full of cynicism for politicians but it is also a romantic movement for those who envisage a different type of future.
No-one is quite sure why the protest caught on like it did. In an interview Caio Martins of the Free Fare Movement replied that something had changed in people’s aspirations. “First, because it caught the people’s imagination.” He added, “To talk about the fare hikes is to talk about the situation in the cities, and transportation is an essential element.”
Brazil has among the most expensive public transportation systems in the world, as well as being aggravatingly inefficient. Privatized years ago, the buses get stuck in traffic and take up inordinate amounts of people’s time and money. Demonstrations started in Sao Paulo, the usually staid capital and financial center of the country. There the contrast between the majority of the population and the elite shows in their way of getting around. The rich fly in private helicopters that buzz through the airways over the congested streets below. Some Brazilians are among the richest people in the world, and live a life as if they were in Switzerland but there are also the poorest in the world—the majority that continues to live a life not substantially different from the times of Brasil’s slavery past. A poor person that lives in the sprawling outskirts of São Paulo spends an average of three hours commuting to work every day inside noisy, packed, and expensive buses, subways, and urban trains. Transportation costs in São Paulo are the highest in the world relative to wages. Residents of São Paulo must work ten times as many hours as residents of Buenos Aires to pay for transportation, and more than twice a worker in Paris. With the privatization of the system, drivers lost their benefits, faced reduced compensations, and had their labor unions severely undermined.
The protests reflected the pandering to this privileged few. Brazil’s preparations for the World Cup in 2014 and the Olympics in 2016 have syphoned away billions of dollars of public funds. The billions of dollars spent have rightly angered millions of Brazilians who live without social infrastructure and lack basic public goods. The new mega-stadiums, airports and hotels will not be shared by the masses of the soccer-loving public. They will accommodate an international elite that can afford to pay the high ticket prices for far fewer but more luxury seats. Not only do the poor receive little benefits from this expenditure, but the infrastructure projects have led to displacement of poor families, especially around the stadiums. The in-your-face inequality represented by the corrupt and wealthy soccer federation provoked signs like, “We want schools and healthcare of the same quality that the FIFA bosses have” and, “The World Cup for whom?” The poor are paying a heavy price international sporting events for the elite. The FIFA has demanded the suspension of basic civil liberties for the games and imposed its own rules to monopolize sales and income related to the games as are the IOC for the following Olympic Games.
For the government and business the two things they care deeply about: the millions in foreign revenue that will supposedly pour in during the mega-events and the image of Brazil as a modern, upcoming leader in the BRICS industrial alliance. Police violence against demonstrators in São Paulo at the beginning of the protest triggered nation-wide mass demonstrations with a broad range of demands targeting all forms of social inequality. The state reaction to the movement has brought to the surface 500 years of repressed anger and frustration towards deep inequality. The rich and powerful have maintained their dominance through five centuries of Brazil’s history, managing challenges with a mix of repression and reform. After the backlash against police repression during the early marches, conservatives shifted quickly from repression to co-optation. Subsequently, virtually all the media and the right-wing parties have been in favor of the demonstrators, and attempt to use them to their advantage. There is a threat that reactionary groups could hijack this political moment to weaken the center-left Workers’ Party.
Despite these manipulations, the demands from the streets call for a rupture, and not reform of the old institutions. This is a rare cry. Brazilians finally appear to be tiring of minor cosmetic changes that have brought little benefit.
The present President promises more concessions to achieve class peace. The ex-president Lula endeavoured to shift income distribution to help the poor: more social programs, higher minimum wage, and higher employment rates. This was made possible by a favorable international scenario that allowed him to help the poor without confronting the interests of the rich. Brazil’s huge trade surpluses generated the funds to finance social programs without compromising the gains of the capitalist class . However, the world financial crisis beginning in 2008 undermined the conditions for this scenario. The current President Dilma Rouseff now faces a different challenge. To help the poor, she will have to confront the rich more. With recent cutbacks of government expenditures and low GDP growth rates the dispute between rich and poor becomes increasingly bitter. The poor want more social programmes and more income redistribution and the Dilma administration cannot realistically deliver, despite the pledges to do so.
For the Socialist Party what began as a campaign by what was originally translated in the British media as the "Free Access Movement" we speculate that this is how the socialist revolution may start, with people taking to the streets to demand Free Access to everything (and, then, consolidating this with an election victory.) We also consider the State’s response of offering conciliatory reforms to bribe and divert workers from their objective as the more likely scenario than one of the Iron Heel and totalitarian suppression.
Adapted from here and here
1 comment:
As mentioned in the blog-post Brazil's left and right struggle for ownership of protests.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/26/brazil-protests
Post a Comment