That could be explained
by the way we look at Brazil. In the past decade, when the country took
some 30 million people out of poverty, Brazilians enjoyed looking at
what the country and its people had achieved: More formal employment,
more investment, more growth, greater spending power for those who had
none, more security and better outlook on life.
On top of that, Brazil
had secured the privilege to host the two main sports events in the
world - the football World Cup and the Summer (Winter in Brazil) Olympic
Games -- in 2014 and 2016, respectively.
Brazil just seemed to have it all. With only one caveat: It did not.
When facts of life began
to remind many Brazilians that their lives were not as good as the
government claimed, and the football extravaganza got closer, indicating
more costs for the state without apparent benefits for the people, many
people began to look at their country in a different light. Instead of
focusing on the achievements, they looked at what they did not have, and
that view seemed to go as far as the Amazon.
In 2010, after eight
years with a hugely popular president, the former metal worker Luiz
Inacio Lula da Silva, Brazil saw his former minister Dilma Rousseff
elected as his successor.
From the same leftist
Workers Party (PT), Rousseff became the first female Brazilian
President. Two-and-a-half years have passed, and she is still popular
among the poorest, but the recent protests were led by a different
bunch: The traditional middle class. On the streets, well-educated
people, from central, urban areas, shouted that they had been sold a
lie.
Inflation is once again a
major concern, violent crime is on the rise, cases of corruption fill
the press, healthcare is in a precarious state, infrastructure projects
have not materialized and street traffic is depressingly worse than
ever.
While TV showed the
inaugurations of costly, lavish football stadiums, people felt their
lives were getting worse by the day. After all, the World Cup will cost
the nation some $15 billion, and the promised legacy in infrastructure
is still nowhere to be seen.
Worst of all: A
government accustomed to surf on its safe popularity, secured mainly by
the distribution of money to the poorest, did not feel the need to
listen. Rousseff's message, in pre-recorded announcements on TV, has
been that the country just could not be better.
The National Congress is
even more to blame, with its representatives lashed by public opinion
for shocking privileges, high salaries and cases of sleaze.
A survey by Datafolha
institute, conducted this week in the city of Sao Paulo, shows a drastic
fall in the prestige of political institutions in the past decade.
Only 19% of respondents
say they hold the office of president in high regard, compared with 51%
in 2003. The percentage of respondents who say they hold the National
Congress in high regard has fallen from 30% in 2003, to 12% now.
Many who took to the
streets in Brazil -- and inspired Brazilians around the world to do the
same in their adopted countries -- carried banners saying: "It is not
only about R$ 0,20."
What they meant is that
the bus fare rise was perhaps the least of their concerns. Corruption,
lack of accountability and a realization that many promises have not
been fulfilled were what led them to the streets.
The suspension of the transport fare rise may take them back to their normal lives.
The issues, however,
will not go away any time soon. And unless they are properly addressed,
those problems can make the people march again.
Source
Source
Post a Comment