Anarquía Coronada

Tag archive

#freelula

Fernando Haddad: “Lula es un parteaguas en la historia de Brasil” // La Tinta

El ex presidente Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, preso político hace 158 días, “pasó el bastón” a Fernando Haddad y a Manuela D’Ávila en la disputa electoral por la presidencia. El ex ministro de la Educación entre 2005 y 2012, y ex alcalde de la ciudad de São Paulo entre 2013 y 2017, sustituirá a Lula como candidato a presidente, mientras Manuela D’Ávila asumirá como candidata a vicepresidenta en la lista electoral del Partido de los Trabajadores (PT).

El anuncio fue realizado el martes por la tarde frente a la sede de la Policía Federal, en la ciudad de Curitiba, donde el ex mandatario está detenido. Lula escribió una carta dirigida al pueblo brasileño, leída por el abogado Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh, uno de los fundadores del PT, donde explica la decisión de designar al ex alcalde de São Paulo para la disputa,destacando la actuación de Haddad como ex ministro de Educación y las políticas públicas que permitieron el acceso de cuatro millones de estudiantes a la educación superior durante su gobierno y el de Dilma Rousseff.

“En verdad, han prohibido que el pueblo brasileño vote libremente para cambiar la triste realidad del país. Nunca he aceptado la injusticia ni la voy a aceptar (…). Es frente a estas circunstancias que tengo que tomar una decisión, en el plazo que se me ha impuesto arbitrariamente. Estoy indicando al PT y a la coalición ‘El pueblo feliz de nuevo’ la sustitución de mi candidatura por la del compañero Fernando Haddad, que, hasta este momento, ha desempeñado con extrema lealtad la posición de candidato a vicepresidente (…). Si quieren acallar nuestra voz y derrotar nuestro proyecto para el país, están muy equivocados. Nosotros seguimos vivos, en el corazón y en la memoria del pueblo. Y nuestro nombre ahora es Haddad”, afirmó Lula en su carta.

 

Al final del documento, el ex mandatario pide a sus seguidores que voten por Haddad y por los candidatos a gobernadores, senadores y diputados del Partido de los Trabajadores.

Haddad dio un discurso en Curitiba donde afirmó que “no desistirá de Brasil y que recibió de Lula la misión de erguirlo”. El actual candidato también reiteró la importancia de Lula para la historia del país.

“No vamos a aceptar, vamos a erguirlo nuevamente, somos brasileños, tenemos la misión hacer que el pueblo recuerde los buenos días que hemos vivido. Siento el dolor de muchos brasileños y brasileñas que van a recibir hoy la noticia que no podrán votar por el candidato que nos gustaría ver subir la rampa del Palacio del Planalto y gobernar el país a partir del 1 de enero. Es un dolor sentido por el pueblo más querido de este país, que sabe lo que representaron nuestros gobiernos, desde el punto de vista de la historia, una historia tan cruel, injusta. Nuestro Lula representó y representa un parteaguas en la historia de Brasil, antes y un después. Lula salió de las entrañas de nuestro pueblo”, dijo.

El Comité de Derechos Humanos de la ONU reafirmó por tercera vez, el pasado lunes, la decisión de asegurar los derechos políticos de Lula como candidato. La presidenta del PT, Gleisi Hoffmann, fue la responsable por presentar la decisión de la candidatura de Haddad. En su discurso, Hoffmann señaló que el PT, los partidos de la lista y los movimientos partidarios lucharon hasta el último momento por el derecho de Lula a ser candidato.

“Quienes participan en esta vigilia acompañan el presidente y conocen todos los enfrentamientos que estamos haciendo. Aunque, desde la cárcel, Lula lidera las encuestas de opinión. Luchamos mucho para hacer de Lula nuestro candidato a presidente. El 15 de agosto, al enfrentar todo ese proyecto, inscribimos la candidatura de Lula en una celebración muy linda en Brasilia. Siempre hemos creído que su candidatura es esencial para sacar el país de la crisis. Es muy triste ver a la democracia brasileña, si es que podemos hablar que vivimos en una, en este proceso. Aceptamos el desafío del presidente Lula, de no dejar al pueblo brasileño sin alternativa para su lucha”, afirmó antes de anunciar la candidatura de Haddad en la coalición “El pueblo feliz de nuevo”.

 

Lula lideraba todas las encuestas de opinión sobre las elecciones de octubre, pero fue impedido de participar en ellas debido a una decisión del Tribunal Superior Electoral (TSE).

El Partido de los Trabajadores mantuvo el nombre de Lula como candidato hasta el último momento posible en el calendario electoral de 2018.

El actual candidato por el Partido de los Trabajadores tuvo el mayor crecimiento en el último sondeo: subió cinco puntos porcentuales y alcanzó el 9 por ciento de la intención de voto. En el sondeo anterior, aún se presentaba al ex ministro de la Educación en un cuestionario posterior al oficial, que presentaba a Lula como candidato.

El PT apuesta ahora en la transferencia de voto de Lula a Haddad. El sondeo del Instituto Datafolha también señala que el 33 por ciento del electorado votaría por el candidato de Lula y el 16 por ciento que “podría votarlo”.

 

La Tinta

Por Rute Pina y Júlia Dolce para Brasil de Fato / Traducción: Luiza Mançano

Lula, us, and the problem of corruption // Diego Sztulwark

I wish we were in conditions to create alternative media! We’ll get there eventually, I believe. But you have to understand that we are in Brazil and not in Europe. It’s another universe, another political education, another experience of struggle! But I think that we will get to that situation, because it is the only way to free ourselves from dependence on the official media.

Ignacio Lula da Silva, 1982

The Perestroika of Capital

Corruption is a phenomenon of perversion or devaluation that, in reference to public life, becomes an ethical or political problem of the first order. To look at the recent history of the use of anti-corruption discourse by those who regulate the mechanisms of social control and accumulation we need to go back to the Menemism of the 1990s. At the end of the Cold War, the business, political, and religious elite, along with the communications apparatus, understood the convenience of resolving their internal disputes within a discursive space that did not question the fundamental lines of the triumphant socioeconomic system. Anti-corruption discourse acted to protect the system and replace class struggle in a context in which the threat of coup by the old military party started to lose force. Moral values and the legal code became the ultimate foundation of the political, annihilating the real substance of democratic practice. As if Machiavelli had not taught us anything about the extra-moral reality of politics. Since then, the rotation of political personnel has been settled by means of accusations, with or without proof, of crimes and embezzlement. We see it today in Brazil, in Ecuador, Peru, and in Argentina. It is that simple. The so-called progressive governments, almost all of whom emerged as the effects of the cycle of social struggles between 1996 and 2003, are being wiped off the map by this procedure, which was initially designed to resolve the internal troubles of those who rule.

Robbing for the Crown

Thus there is a clear need for a political thought that is critical of that discourse focused on denouncing corruption. In an initial and aerial review of some things that have already been stated and written about the issue, the following points of departure could be considered:

  1. Corruption of democracy. After the crisis caused by debt in the 1980s, and lasting until the crisis of the end of the 1990s, local elites reached an agreement with the global creditors on a mode of capturing collective surplus value through the state: privatizations, bonus festivals, etc. These function as mechanisms for transferring public resources to the large economic groups and international credit agencies. During that time, corruption was a class resource oriented toward situating the state as an instrument of social exploitation and as internal compensation between factions of the ruling class block. This process of dispossession was carried out in full democracy, by hijacking popular representation. Corruption thus became an indispensable mechanism for the misappropriation of the decision-making process to the benefit of large capital and caused the sterilization of the democratic potential of the rule of law and the parliamentary system.
  2. Corruption of communitarian forms. If we go beyond a focus on political modes, neoliberalism is a way of corrupting communal forms of life. Enzo Traverso refers to neoliberalism directly as an “anthropology.” It is a regime for managing the processes of individuation that blocks and assaults all figures of collective power that are not functional to the entrepreneurial hero. As anthropologist Rita Segato explains (and as the March 8 Women’s Strike movement foregrounds), the violent penetration of this neoliberal subjectification can only be reversed if political bodies – institutions, governments, states – were returned to a popular communitarian jurisdiction.

War against Democracy

The discourse against corruption and in favor of a republic of capital is posed as a war against democracy (even against the republic that, in a classic sense, is an indissoluble effort to liquidate the power of the party of the rich over the public). Its principle apparatuses are, according to a brief text by Hardt and Negri – Declaration –, processes of the mediatization of perception, representation of the political, securitization of life, and indebtedness or the subordination of social cooperation through finance. Private property is the foundation coordinating these four apparatuses that produce individuals devoid of social bonds. Without a critique that goes to the root of this complex machinery, it is impossible to understand how the phenomena of cruelty in neoliberal society are constituted, nor the strategic importance that anti-corruption discourse takes on as a way of delegitimizing any figure of the collective that is formed based on principles that are different from and in opposition to those of neoliberalism.

Destroy Lula!

To destroy Lula is to destroy the pioneering and systematic effort to create a new left based on social movements (https://lobosuelto.com/?p=19295) following the fall of the Soviet Union. Grassroots ecclesial communities, movements of landless campesinos, the powerful metalworkers’ unionism, the intellectuals who had resisted the dictatorship: the PT was formed as a non-Stalinist, mass-based political expression capable of convoking and inspiring social struggles across the continent. And it did so under the powerful leadership of a man born into the poverty of Northeast Brazil, himself a metalworker and union leader. It is true that Lula and the PT distanced themselves greatly from that effort when, once in government, they took pains to transform the novelty of this left into a friendly (and very celebrated) attitude in forums such as that of Davos. On the other hand, during those years the left made numerous criticisms of the PT and much of the left distanced itself from the party. In fact, the PT governments implemented neoliberal policies and repressed, in an absolutely unforgivable way, the movements that came out for free transportation and other demands in 2013. It is essential to fully understand the PT’s limits on these fundamental issues, for which we can turn to Toni Negri’s recent dialogue with important party cadres (https://lobosuelto.com/?p=19305) Despite all of this and due to the historical role that they played both at the national level and the continental level, Lula and the PT continue being an obstacle for the most powerful bourgeoisie on the continent. Destroying Lula, in this precise historical moment, is to liquidate any possible democratic articulation between institutions and popular movements.

The Perfect Crime

The neoliberal regime – that of unbridled capital and its operators – feels capable of carrying out an improbable perfect crime; it has too much confidence in the inactivity of the plebeian floor that acts from below and beyond parties and governments. But perhaps everything could be seen in the opposite way if we start from the movements of the landless, the homeless, the inhabitants of the peripheries, and the women’s movement, that ongoing molecular movement that liberals and conservatives are allied in opposition to, which have created a crisis in the democratic political space in which conflicts have been resolved up to now.  As the psychoanalyst Suely Rolnik wrote recently, it is out of these explosive components that new strategies of resistance will emerge (https://outraspalavras.net/brasil/666381/ ).

#FreeLula

Ir a Arriba