
What is Happening in Brazil - paulovsk
https://medium.com/i-m-h-o/d2e5f1f632ef
======
mtgx
Politicians tend to become worse and worse thinking and seeing from experience
that they can "get away with it". But in reality all this time, the population
gets more and more frustrated, and it's only a matter of time before the
population revolts.

So far the Brazilian politicians have been _lucky_ that all these 1 million
people haven't become _violent_ and ask for their blood. Because to be honest,
I think at least some of the corrupt leaders need to be punished _severely_ ,
possibly even with the death penalty (like Ceausescu was in Romania).

It's really the only way they'll learn their lesson, and more importantly,
future generations of politicians will know now to upset the population to the
point where they'll revolt and ask for their execution. I'm not usually pro-
death penalty, but if there's anyone deserving it, it's the oppressive/corrupt
leaders that make millions of people suffer through their ruling.

I definitely think the leaders _intentionally_ abusing their own Constitution
deserve the death penalty, because if they don't get that, then it's just an
invitation for future leaders to abuse it. They swore to protect it and obey
it, and there needs to be a way to force them to do just that. Otherwise
what's the point? Imagine how different things would be in US, if politicians
would fear death penalty if they abuse the Constitution, and keep passing
unconstitutional laws.

I feel almost the same way about bankers who get away with their crimes. How
are they supposed to learn their lesson if they aren't even threatened by
prison time, even though they lost the pensions and deposits of millions of
people? If they think they have the potential to earn tens of billions of
hundreds of billions from risking the money of those people, they'll be much
more inclined to do it if they only risk a couple of billion in penalty, and
that's it.

The population is supposed to rectify these sort of abuses by the elite in a
society. It's up to the population to ultimately decide how much of a
punishment these people get, and if their "representatives" aren't up for it,
then they need to change them, or at least scare them into applying their
will.

~~~
Fargren
But the any constitution may have(read, HAS) things that are wrong.
Constitutions were written by people too. People are fallible, and the
possibility exists that going against what they wrote ten-score years ago is
just plain wrong, and going against it is the correct thing to do. I don't
think leaders should fear correcting the wrongs in the building blocks of
their countries; it should be their utmost responsibility.

Now, this is not what is happening here. Not at all. But taking the
constitution as sacrosanct and making going against it punishable by death is
_not_ a good idea. Is dogmatic and wrong. The responsibility of politicians is
towards the people, not towards the constitution.

~~~
wslh
_The responsibility of politicians is towards the people, not towards the
constitution._

Do you mean to the current people? and/or the future generations? and/or the
past ones?

~~~
Fargren
The current people, and the future generations inasmuch as their well-being is
relevant and important to the current ones.

~~~
wslh
For example, what do you think about the current constitutional issues in
Argentina? do you agree with the supreme court ruling?

~~~
Fargren
Are we talking about the judicial system reform? I believe the current system
of choosing the magistrate is quite bad, but the alternative that's being
suggested is rife with it's own problems. As such, I don't think it's worth
changing the constitution. I really like the current composition of the
Supreme Court, and I trust their decision. I do think there are ways to change
the system for the best, and I hope there'll be a joint effort to come up with
a better alternative to the current system.

------
_delirium
A somewhat different analysis of the current situation, reaching quite
different conclusions:

[http://frombrazil.blogfolha.uol.com.br/2013/06/21/sao-
paulo-...](http://frombrazil.blogfolha.uol.com.br/2013/06/21/sao-paulo-
protests-things-have-changed/)

I hadn't seen until I read that that the original organizers of the protest,
the MPL, have actually pulled out and denounced some of the current protestors
due to them being coopted by right-wing groups.

The blog post linked here makes a curious comment about "corruption...
especially after the fall of the military regime". I'm not 100% sure if this
is intended as a dog-whistle comment to the right, but it's a common sort of
discourse among the right-wing, to excuse the dictatorship or even call for a
new one by using corruption as the opening, since allegedly the dictatorship,
for all its faults, was clean and got the trains running on time etc.

~~~
rauljara
I'm not sure the blog post you linked to reached any conclusions. It merely
observed that not all of the hundreds of thousands of protestors are all of
the same mind and political ideology. It would be pretty shocking if that were
not the case. It ended wondering what would happen next, not declaring what
would. Mass movements are unpredictable. So is life.

You chose one line out of context from the original article to highlight a
"dog whistle to the right" in support of a dictatorship while the rest of the
article is an impassioned plea for human rights.

Any time there's a mass movement, many different people will try to co-opt it.
It doesn't mean that you should avoid supporting the movement. It means that
it is very important to vocally support the parts of it that you do agree
with, so that the parts you don't remain on the fringes.

Acting like the whole movement is suspect because of a few strikes me as very
counter-productive.

~~~
_delirium
I'm not intending to say that the whole movement is suspect; more that I'm
wary of the particular linked blog post's analysis of the movement and what
its aims are / should be.

------
Uperte
Quote from prosecutor's FB according to this blog post: “I’m trying to get
home for the past two hours, but I can’t because there’s some protesters
blocking off traffic […] please, somebody tell the police that this area is
under the jurisdiction of my court and, if any of them kill a protester, I’ll
just archive the case”. Scary!

~~~
angersock
Yep.

I understand this as a humorous remark, no doubt, but there are certain
positions of power from which I do not appreciate joking.

~~~
icebraining
It's a little more than just an humorous remark (EDIT: not that I'm assuming
he would actually archive the cases); the original text seems much more
hateful. The last part of the post is roughly:

 _Shitty petistas¹. Motherfuckers. (...) I miss the time when this kind of
thing was resolved with rubber (sticks) on the backs of the cowards..._

¹ Supporters of the Partido Trabalhista, as far as I can tell.

------
throwaway395748
This has been a very depressing week. Regardless of the many fair causes being
taken by the protesters to the street, as a Brazilian living in São Paulo, I
was worried since the beginning that the whole thing would turn into the mess
we can see now. And while I sympathize what many of these causes, the lack of
a proper, unified list of demands makes the whole thing completely worthless
in the best case, and quite dangerous in the worst.

On the bright side, it was funny the watch the national and foreign media
trying to understand what was going on. And then my own friends and coworkers
who supported the whole thing trying to explain what they thought it was about
(each one with a different explanation).

~~~
justin66
> And while I sympathize what many of these causes, the lack of a proper,
> unified list of demands makes the whole thing completely worthless in the
> best case, and quite dangerous in the worst.

"Represent us, not yourselves" is the message delivered by these sorts of
protests. It's more effective than an itemized list.

> And then my own friends and coworkers who supported the whole thing trying
> to explain what they thought it was about (each one with a different
> explanation).

This makes perfect sense amongst people who aren't being represented at all
well by their government - the government isn't just doing one thing badly, so
of course there isn't agreement over what they're doing wrong. It says
something kind of ugly about you that you think it's "funny."

------
sambeau
I was reading the _European Convention on Human Rights_ recently and I was
surprised to see that Article 2 explicitly allows for states to kill people to
quell rioting or insurrection:

    
    
      Article 2 – Right to life
      :
      2. Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this 
         article when it results from the use of force which is no more than 
         absolutely necessary:
         :
        c. in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection.
    

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_2_of_the_European_Conve...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_2_of_the_European_Convention_on_Human_Rights)

~~~
rayiner
You have to read "riot" in context of "insurrection." Armed uprisings are put
down with lethal force. That's not inconsistent with western thought. E.g. its
one of the first things the fledgling U.S. federal government did in response
to a rebellion in Massachusetts:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays'_Rebellion#Rebellion](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shays'_Rebellion#Rebellion).

Vis-a-vis riots, read in the context of "insurrection" you might interpret it
as referring to the kind of riots you see in say Bangladesh: labor strikes
where people bomb things.

------
jonmc12
This article left me thinking about how big of a mess the 2014 world cup could
be - a whirlwind of political protest, drunken fans and violence. Brazilian
leadership really has their work cut out of them. However, in China, where
oppression and corruption also exist, the 2008 Olympics was an event of
unifying nationalism.

Then, as the article portrays, Arab countries can oust their leaders, but
Brazilians choose to re-elect corrupt politicians.

Why does it seem like communist countries can inspire nationalism and pride,
and the people of dictatorships can change leadership. Yet, Brazil, as a
democratic country, is depicted as imagining disgrace (in world cup /
Olympics) and unable to instigate political change?

~~~
alexqgb
Simply electing leaders isn't enough in systems with winner-take-all dynamics.
Brazil, Turkey, and Egypt all encapsulate this basic truth.

[http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/21/the_tyranny...](http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/21/the_tyranny_of_the_majority_brazil_turkey_protests)

------
superflit
The Left started the protests to attack the gov. of Sao Paulo one of largest
city in Brazil that is in the hands of 'right' wing. After the middle class
joined the protest things changed because the middle class only see political
'right' or 'left' as:

which hand is stealing? If it is 'center' is both...

As the protest backfired agains the left and the president (left too) they are
trying to get over the protest..

But it is a long way to put all sardines back in the can.

------
tomjen3
Regardless of who started it, attacking peaceful demonstrators and journalists
with that much tear gas is just wrong. When you add that those they attacked
where chanting no violence and where running away, the police should have done
nothing at all.

------
gcb0
Stop this nonsense. Don't give voice to those people. Just the 1st paragraph
shows he has no clue of what's happening.

Nobody protested because of 20cents. Those were yearly protests by movement
free pass (passe livre). Their goal is free public transportation and they do
demonstrations for at least 10yrs.

It's just for effect that they time the demonstrations to the fare raises.

And now, the media giving voice to that kind of people is what made the govt
get away with 20c less on the fare for this issue. It totally undermined the
movement and alienated newcomers.

Those people eager to appear in the media effectively destroyed the leadership
and turned the protest into a headless occupy wallstreet kind of thing.

Yesterday there were talks of the military taking opportunity and throwing A
COUPE... Highly improbable but since now nobody has any direction, even within
the gov, it was a real fear for some in the workers party that heads govmnt
currently.

~~~
gruseom
So if it didn't start because of public transport, why did it, and what is it
about?

------
noone1234456
Just my 2 cents, but saying "paying one of the biggest taxes in the world" is
_really_ exaggerated

~~~
hikarudo
Income tax might not be so high, but taxes for products are very high.
Electricity: about 45%, gasoline: about 50%. Import tax/PIS/Confins/ICMS are
calculated one after the other, so you pay tax over tax.

------
albertobrandao
Great article. Congrats, bro.

------
joseflavio
Sorry, but I call bs on this blog: "Feel Free To Kill Protesters", who said
this? The author doesn't point any reference to confirm this quote, and I
could not find it nowhere else.

~~~
weslly
\- [http://noticias.uol.com.br/cotidiano/ultimas-
noticias/2013/0...](http://noticias.uol.com.br/cotidiano/ultimas-
noticias/2013/06/10/promotor-que-incitou-violencia-contra-manifestantes-em-sp-
tera-conduta-investigada-pelo-mp-para-oab-sp-houve-crime.htm)

\- [http://g1.globo.com/sao-paulo/noticia/2013/06/apos-
sugerir-m...](http://g1.globo.com/sao-paulo/noticia/2013/06/apos-sugerir-
morte-de-manifestantes-promotor-se-arrepende-e-exclui-post.html)

EDIT: You can see this in english here:
[http://frombrazil.blogfolha.uol.com.br/2013/06/14/fear-
and-l...](http://frombrazil.blogfolha.uol.com.br/2013/06/14/fear-and-loathing-
in-sao-paulo/) (search for "prosecutor")

~~~
joseflavio
Unbelievable the downvote, it doesn't change the fact that Blog post has
absolutely no references or names.

------
fiatjaf
I'm brazilian and this article is a lie. nobody has heard about anybody saying
this, and the visions the author of the article atributes to all the
manifesters are just his visions.

also, the author is an idiot.

~~~
petegrif
Thanks for the detailed rebuttal. Your considered response opened my eyes to
the reality of the situation. Many thanks.

