
Brasília at Midnight - Petiver
http://evenmagazine.com/brasilia-at-midnight/
======
andrenth
As a Brazilian I can say this article is full of misinformation regarding
current political events.

The "coup" allegations are nothing but ridiculous. What kind of coups is done
with ample defense opportunity and full validation of the Supreme Court?
There's nothing flimsy about the fiscal fraud committed by the soon to be
former president. And while this is not being considered for the impeachment
process (because it happened after it had began), she is under investigation
for obstruction of justice (for nominating Lula a minister in the hopes of
escaping the corruption investigations), and people who worked for her party
and who are now in jail have confirmed she was fully aware of the corruption
scheme and money laundering in the form of campaign donations.

It's funny because in 92 the same politicians who are now claiming a coup is
going on have voted in favor of impeachment on much lighter claims against the
president at the time (including the same nonsense speeches as house members
voted in congress).

The part about the outrage for the the end of the Ministry of Culture shows a
lot of what's wrong with Brazil: everyone wants their own government tit to
suck from. As if culture can be created by government bureocrats.

No wonder the previous government's cabinet had 38 ministries, including the
Ministry of Fishing. At least it didn't come to a point where we had a
Ministry of Happiness like in Venezuela.

~~~
caiob
> _What kind of coups is done with ample defense opportunity and full
> validation of the Supreme Court?_

Ermmm.. defense opportunity? A totally partisan-biased Supreme Court does not
leave much for a defense strategy. That's like putting Benghazi to be judged
by the GOP.

>_It's funny because in 92 the same politicians who are now claiming a coup is
going on have voted in favor of impeachment_

Maybe because they're being consistent on their stances?

~~~
andrenth
> Ermmm.. defense opportunity?

Yes. Multiple opportunities for the defense to expose its views and interview
witnesses, both in congress and senate.

> A totally partisan-biased Supreme Court

The majority of the current Supreme Court has been appointed by in the Lula
and Dilma governments and are strongly tied to their party, including a former
lawyer of a party member who is now in jail.

If there's any bias, it's in favor of the accused.

~~~
meira
The defense had N opportunities to proof (and they proved) that Rousseff
didn't commit any crime. But it doesn't matter, because it's not a real
judgement. It's a theatrical judgement for stupid guys like you to have a
justificativa. But yeah, no stupid personagens believe it. It was a coup. And
I should have Said, in the beginning, first thing: Temer out.

~~~
andrenth
Thanks for the ad hominem, it shows the depth of your arguments.

LOL at "Temer out". This is really all that you people know how to do, right?
"Itamar out", "FHC out", "Temer out"... It's only a coup attempt when it turns
against you.

~~~
woliveirajr
:-) there's some argument that could be used, but people don't know enough to
use then except for the "that's a coup", "temer out" or any other crying...

Your comments, otoh, are well done. Voted up

------
emersonrsantos
For anyone trying to understand what's happening in Brazil and Venezuela, read
about Foro de Sao Paulo [1], a socialist collective that is influencing
politics since 1990.

Their leaders led Latin-American countries to social and economical disasters
and now are facing impeachment or being replaced. The Kirchner family of
Argentina were the first to fall after twelve years in power [2]. In Brazil,
Dilma is standing the last phase of the impeachment trial after her party
stood 14 years in power [3]. Maduro is trying everything to avoid to face a
referendum that will get him removed from power [4].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foro_de_São_Paulo](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foro_de_São_Paulo)

[2] [http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/argentinas-
kirchner-...](http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/argentinas-kirchner-era-
ends)

[3] [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/brazil-
com...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-04/brazil-committee-
votes-for-rousseff-final-impeachment-trial)

[4] [http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-
america-36523986](http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36523986)

~~~
molmalo
To be fair, they got in power mainly because of the economical disasters
generated by the neo-liberal governments in the nineties and early 2000's.

Argentina was led to the worst crisis in its history. So, most people here are
really tired of the political class, both left and right being perceived as
equally corrupt.

Yes, there are fanatical groups that support one or the other, but the vast
majority just vote for the lesser evil... Kind of like how some people who
I've talked to feel right now in the US, having to choose between Hillary and
Trump...

~~~
ucaetano
That's exactly the opposite of the history in Brazil.

In the 8 years before PT took power, the country finally had stable economics,
decreasing unemployment and increasing income levels.

~~~
forinti
The previous government had unemployment of 8.3% in its first year and 11.7%
in its last year (and 12% inflation). PT was voted into power for a reason.

~~~
ucaetano
But compare that to the years before the government.

~~~
forinti
It was lower. The 1990's were not nice.

[https://brasilfatosedados.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/desempreg...](https://brasilfatosedados.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/desemprego-
evolucao1986-2010-2/)

------
olh
This article is spot on. There is an important detail that sounds like
conspiracy theory and that bothers me as a brazilian: much of the extent of
the economical crisis was orchestrated with propaganda by sectors of our
society engulfed in corruption charges (from briberies to tax evasion) after
the global drop in commodities prices and suddenly investments halted by
market fear and a real crisis took place (and then a "market-friendly"
politician took power to "reinstate growth", conveniently, and slowed down the
anti-corruption drive).

There was a common headline at the time in newspapers: "apesar da crise",
meaning "even though in a crisis", followed by the report of a new
market/business sector record in profits.

I always saw my country as a place free of the type of conspiracy that
vultures around US politics by pure incompetence of our own politicians to
plan and execute things like that but the recent events gave me a reality
check.

~~~
geezerjay
> There was a common headline at the time in newspapers: "apesar da crise",
> meaning "even though in a crisis", followed by the report of a new
> market/business sector record in profits.

A couple of months ago in a conversation with a Brazilian colleague of mine,
who has been living in europe for some years now, the subject of Brazil's
crisis popped up. He told me that, at least when compared with the economic
crisis experienced in europe, Brazil's crisis was a crisis in name only, which
barely had any impact on the economy in general and disposable income of the
average brazilian in particular.

Now, having read your comment, I have to say that it fits precisely with the
observations made by my brazilian colleague.

~~~
woliveirajr
Your colleague is wrong. Deeply wrong. Crisis happens when unemployment is
high (but government hides it, saying that anyone who is getting some
governmental support isn't unemployed. And when prices rise. And when
controlled prices are low against all the world market just to pump
popularity...

There are so many wrong and deceptive comments here, at news.y, that it really
makes me sad about how much illusion was sold in those 12 years of PT
government, and how many years and generations it'll take to fix this up.

~~~
geezerjay
The thing is, Brazil's supposedly high unemployment rate peaks around 12%,
which is quite close to structural unemployment.

Meanwhile in Spain the unemployment rate is around 22%.

You're unintentionally proved my point: Brazil's supposed crisis isn't a
crisis at all when compared to what happened all across europe. A slight
economic downturn doesn't make it a crisis.

~~~
woliveirajr
My point is that this "12%" isn't real. It comes from the definition of
"persons looking for a job and not finding one". A very precise definition
that hides:

\- all persons that had a job, lost it and now are just receiving help from
the government (but aren't looking for a job)

\- all those who are receiving benefits from the government to receive a
minimum wage, and prefer to live in that situation than tho seek for a job

\- the almost 50% (I think) that have informal jobs, so aren't looking for one
but don't contribute to the government providence (the gov. account that
provides money to the benefits)

Yes, I agree with you that it isn't like Spain. But it's because the govn.
spent much money giving social benefits without some "financial exit" ahead.

Exactly like some people calling the changes a "coup" have their reasons, but
it doesn't compare with what happened (or almost happened) in Turkey.

(And sorry if I can't express myself in a better way in English)

------
hcarvalhoalves
> The rich want her out, the poor want her to stay put.

That's so oversimplified, it's laughable.

The middle class want her out and the poor never participated in politics in
Brazil, and it's no different now.

The _real rich_ always made money from the government either way, since big
companies (banking, construction, telecom, you name it) either get incentives
and legislation that help hold monopolies, or have the government as primary
clients.

Author is apparently ignorant about Brazil's socio economics and history.
Considering the praising of the rich left, artists and Niemeyer (self-
proclaimed communist architect of Brasilia, considered today a failure in city
planning), his analysis not only lack in depth but also balance.

~~~
hackernews2000
The author likely interviewed public university Humanities professors about it
all, and they defend PT and its failed policies above everything. They are
even still in denial about Venezuela. Maybe they want us to become like it.

I'm very poor (my only comfort in life is my computer; have been using the
same clothes for almost 10 years, commute for almost 2 hours on trains and
buses to get to the "good parts" of my city etc.) and am I'm hit hard by Dilma
and PT, because their policies ruined our economy and even fucking rice and
beans (our staple food) is terribly expensive now (the dollar exchange rate is
high as ever, so producers now prefer to export everything they can than
selling locally).

------
rafaelferreira
As another Brazillian, let me offer an attempt at a more distanced take on the
matter. Roussef's impeachment proceedings are motivated by alleged budget
manipulation. I don't think there are many who would say the maneuvers in
question were 100% kosher, but the question of whether it is a sound basis for
impeaching an elected president is not a simple one. Renowned legal scholars
differ on this point.

In particular, it is clear the congress voted for her ousting due to a series
of reasons unrelated to the allegations. One reason is the dismal state of the
economy, likely due in no small part to Roussef's policy decisions. Another
reason is that a majority of politicians, from all major parties, are facing
serious corruption charges from a large, unprecedented, investigation
conducted by the federal police, and the impeachment acts as a diversionaty
tactic (there are recordings proving this is not a conspiracy theory). Lastly,
there is the usual power struggle, that is fiercer and more complex in an
environment with many political parties.

In all, a complex scenario that does not bode well for the immediate future of
the Brazilllian democracy.

~~~
forinti
I am not an economist, but it seems to me that Brazil's economic woes
originated in the private sector. It simply became too leveraged in the boom
years of Lula's government and couldn't handle the aftermath of the 2008
crash.

Dilma, on her part, gave in to the austerity camp (both left and right can't
seem to give up this mentality) and made matters worse. In part, this was
driven by inflation fear mongering by the media.

~~~
brguy
She only gave in to "austerity" after the federal government financial
situation became unsustainable. Even then, the spending cuts were minimal.

The economy was already slowing down in 2011, and Roussef's government lowered
interest rates and started giving subsidies to certain sectors and companies
in order to stimulate economic activity. Some economists said this was a bad
idea with potential disastrous consequences considering the global slowdown
that was happening. IMHO, they were spot on. The private companies that went
under since then were mostly the ones that were financed by public money. It
was a failure of cronyism.

~~~
forinti
Exactly, austerity was applied only on the demand side (social spending and
infrastructure), but the problem was precisely the demand side. The private
sector didn't need more loans or tax cuts, they needed customers and profits.

~~~
brguy
Most of the budget is fixed by law, so those were pretty much the only areas
where costs could be cut. Social and infrastructure spending was actually
record high before the crisis hit, so to say everything was caused by
austerity is misleading.

~~~
forinti
Well, I didn't say everything was caused by austerity. I said austerity made
it worse.

Social and infrastructure spending might have been high, but I think they were
actually insufficient. Politics and economics are too skewed to the right in
Brazil. Look at our budget surpluses for the last few decades:

[https://brasilfatosedados.wordpress.com/2014/12/07/3047-supe...](https://brasilfatosedados.wordpress.com/2014/12/07/3047-superavit-
primario-setor-publico-do-pib/)

And then look at the UK's budget history:

[http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u_6bLBEcvus/VIL2bc4et6I/AAAAAAAAB7...](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-u_6bLBEcvus/VIL2bc4et6I/AAAAAAAAB70/hmWudWtqETU/s1600/Deficit,48-.png)

Even Thatcher had deficits all along.

~~~
andrenth
> Politics and economics are too skewed to the right in Brazil.

This is the most absurd out of touch with reality statement I've read this
week.

Brazil has 30+ parties almost all with "social" or "socialist" in their name.
It's 50 shades of red down here.

~~~
forinti
It is a matter of personal opinion, after all. Anyway, I took the trouble to
enumerate the ten largest parties in the brazilian congress and got their
political position from Wikipedia (so as not to corrupt it with my own ideas):

PT - Centre-left; PMDB - Centre; PSDB - Centre (implemented neoliberal agenda
in the 1990s); PP - Centre-right/Right; PSD - Centre-right; PR - Centre; PSB -
Centre-left/Left; PTB - Centre; DEM - Centre-right (this I find hard to
believe); PRB - Centre-right.

~~~
woliveirajr
Please give me some minutes to edit wikipedia skip you can get it right :-)

The "right" or "centre-right" would get votes from democrats with a big
smile...

------
kevin_thibedeau
> Brasília, the country’s Oscar Niemeyer-designed modern masterpiece of a
> capital

I think it's more of an dehumanizing homage to concrete and the car.

~~~
caiob
In the 60s, that was a modern masterpiece. Can't blame Niemeyer for living in
a time where cars and roads were a priority.

~~~
fcanesin
It is and always was the reflect of a dysfunctional view of society. One fit
for the military dictatorships of its time. One with no concern for mass
transport, housing and entertainment (even as the 60s where when metro started
in Rio and São Paulo). It is where by design one would live the closest to the
artificial lakes and best public infrastructure according to the position it
has on the State administration.

With no place though for the supporting people, who ended living in rings of
poverty around the designed opulence. Going on-and-of during hours everyday to
serve the rich bureaucrats they support.

Having been there sometimes, it is disgusting.

------
personlurking
A good article, aside from the art world/gallery angle which didn't speak to
me. At least in regards to the Car Wash investigation, there is some sentiment
in Brazil that the country will get better once the old system gets flushed
out. It's a bit of a tall order, though, as corruption exists on many levels.

There was a study a few years back showing how most Brazilians have a high
distrust of each other, save for family and friends, meaning there's an
individualism that prevails in regards to the former and an extreme
cohesiveness with the latter (something I found to be true in my several years
living there).

On another note, most Brazilians aren't patriotic [read: proud] -- something
that, according to Brazilian anthropologist Roberto DaMatta, requires a
coming-together of positive feelings regarding culture and the State (imagine
a Venn Diagram where the middle section is patriotism and then imagine one
where the two circles don't even intersect -- the latter is Brazil, according
to DaMatta). There are countless reasons to be proud of their cultural
diversity and output, but seemingly very few reasons to be proud of the State.

Brazilian economist Eduardo Giannetti, who recently published his book
Trópicos Utópicos (Utopic Tropics), had the following to say about the current
climate in Brazil in a recent El Pais article (from which I'm translating):

"Brazilians society is very individualistic, we have a lot of difficulty with
anything related to collective action and organization. These protest
movements, for example, are eruptions. They don't have any consistency or
continuity, they are emotional explosions without any kind of commitment to
unfolding or to [be made into a] project. In addition, Brazil has as an
abstract aspirational reference to attain American affluence, but they are not
prepared in their daily lives for the degree of commitment, dedication and
discipline of work. It's like the Greeks wanting to live at a German standard
without having German productivity. This doesn't add up. For a while cash
transfers allowed this trick, but at some point it stops working. The new
element in the world we are in now is that what was an ethical critique has
now become an objective, biological question of survival. Reality has been
imposed. Nature has limits. And not only external nature, but also the inner
nature of man. This calculative civilizing, aggressively competitive, process
based on the permanent logic of productivity attacks something very deep in
the archaic psyche of the human being. He does not accept this well. There is
a widespread malaise, a discontent with some valuable thing in life that is
lost in this model. And Brazil, even with its slowness, maintains an even less
damaging relationship with this deep psyche of our evolutionary past. Our
emotional celebration of life is something we have to know how to cherish. It
is a gift. We must recognize that Brazilian potential, to seek out a path that
is ours and that reflects our values. We are fully capable of living at their
level. In art and popular music we already attain this expression. What's
missing is to translate it into practical life."

___

If anyone wants to see one of Niemeyer's rather abstract Brasília in Ruins
paintings, it's here
[http://i.imgur.com/uY2gzKk.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/uY2gzKk.jpg)

~~~
ittekimasu
... and Brazil is one of the better BRICS (actually the highest in per-capita,
if I remember right).

------
meira
Great to see this kind of article here.

