On April 4, 2018, former Brazilian President lula da Silva’s appeal to the Supreme Court of Brazil was rejected and that, some believe, came as a major blow to the Brazil’s poor. The verdict ended the slim hope that lula, his labour party, and their sympathisers at home and abroad had for his epic comeback to the realm of Brazilian presidency that is marred with scandals since his departure seven years ago.
Prior to this imminent judgment, lula was projected as the frontrunner in the upcoming October presidential election, and thus he would have, hypothetically, assumed office by January 1, 2019. Undeniably, lula and his party carry slender majority votes as was showcased in the run-off presidential elections of 2010 and 2014; on both occasions, the impeached President Dilma Rousseff won.
Since lula has left office, the highest bureau in the hierarchy of the Brazilian federal system has remained unpopular and arguably unfilled. Even though his successor completed her first term and became President for the second time, she was impeached. Her successor, incumbent Brazilian President Michel Temer has been hit with various kinds of corruption allegations. He has been a scandalous figure, albeit surviving the impeachment. Both Rousseff and Temer have lacked the charisma lula had shown throughout his popular terms as President of Brazil from 2003 to 2011, and they have failed to fill his shoes.
lula’s supporters and opponents alike can only imagine what his comeback to power would have meant to them; however, that sensation of excitement and fear seems to have gone, perhaps, permanently. lula, now 72, has to serve 12 years in prison. By the time, he is out of prison if alive and cleared of legal restrictions, given his “criminal” conviction, it is unrealistic to fancy his chance of validating his influential stature in the future.
Perhaps, this upcoming presidential election was the last shot for a decisive figure in lula’s caliber — loved by the masses and hated by mid-level oligarchs. The top oligarchs, particularly, those involved in the “car wash” case, seems to have been his partners in crime. Whether portrayed as a great leader or as a corrupt one, Brazilians should hold no grudge against one another in the form of lula’s supporters and his opponents. They should view the current state of affairs of their beautiful country as a major opportunity to draw lessons. Why should any single individual attain the level of political influence that lula had been able to achieve in a big country like BrazilIJ After all, either power or the fear of losing it is corrupt.
Oligarchy, Democracy or Polity
Aristotle preferred polity where oligarchy and democracy meet, and their constituencies make compromise to reach a win-win consensus on the basis of a constitution to realise equal rights and opportunities as citizens. The democracy that Aristotle was reluctant to recommend is the form of government where the masses have the power to serve themselves at the expenses of the oligarchs. Similarly, he warned of oligarchy for being despotic in exploiting the masses. As diverse Brazil is, it needs a polity that serves all classes of the society.
Irrefutably, oligarchs or elites have exploited the masses in almost every country and for the most part, they continue to do so. As a factory worker, lula had experienced this personally and, maybe, he and his party had taken Brazil far away from oligarchy — beyond polity — to a pluralistic democracy, leaned toward the tyranny of the majority. In this transition, the mid-level oligarchs had become the primary victims of oppression by the majority masses. (I witnessed this, as my father-in-law, an honest business owner, on the outskirts of Sao Paulo, lost everything in 2014.)
lula’s critical role
lula’s presidency from 2003 to 2011 was one of the most critical decades for Brazil’s future considering his popularity as the first unconventional president. Economically, the predecessor President, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, a well-known Brazilian scholar, had not only pulled Brazil out of the crisis between 1995 and 2003 but also had placed the country on an automatic development trajectory that was growth bound inevitably. However, socio-politically, the country was on the verge of uncertainty. It could go left, right or in the middle with President lula being in the driving seat.
Given lula’s charisma and popularity in Brazil and beyond, he had every opportunity to make choices, best for all Brazilians. Regretfully, lula had already fallen victim of the vicious cycle of the oppressed and the oppressor when he assumed office. He wanted to serve the workers at the expenses of the “exploitive” business owners. He could have risen above such a revenge-based partisan leadership, as Nelson Mandela did in South Africa, to serve all Brazilians regardless of class. Instead, he went to become the president of the “poor” exclusively, as claimed in his goodbye speech in 2011.
lula’s sincere attempts to help the poor deserve the highest praise possible, but his rhetoric of the poor against the rich translated into intense labour and taxation policies targeting small and medium-sized businesses caused detrimental damages to middle-class Brazilians. Instead of pushing for effortless income and overprotective labour laws in support of the workers, he could have focused on their “capabilities” by effectively investing in education.
Watching crimes of robbery on daylight in Brazilian neighbourhoods during the World Cup 2014 and the Rio Olympics 2016 in global mass media, lula, and his party, in power for over a decade, have to bear some responsibility for failing to address some of the core socio-economic problems of Brazil.
Nonetheless, lula’s supporters are left heartbroken and there is truth in their narrative that Brazilian elites imprisoned their leader. Given the intimidating impact of Brazil’s army chief’s tweet hours before the Supreme Court’s narrow judgment of 5-6 to reject lula’s appeal, in which he clearly threatened the highest court justices of a military action if lula was granted the appeal.
Time to move forward
It is time that Brazilians stop pointing the finger at one another as lula’s supporters and his opponents for the sake of their unity. After all, lula went on trial and is imprisoned on charges of corruption. They need to protect their country from “perversion” form of oligarchy or “bad” democracy where either the oligarchs or the masses are selfishly pushing for their interests in zero-sum approaches.
They may have to adjust to Aristotle’s polity form of government by following his teacher’s advice of bringing a “philosopher king”, as they did in the case of former President Cardoso in the mid-90s, to save their country once again. Otherwise, the counterproductive class competition between “some segments” in the upper and lower classes of the country will prevent Brazil from reaching its full potential as an emerging economy. This will also spoil the essence of being Brazilians: a happy, diverse, harmonious, loving and united people. “Idolatrada”!
(The writer is a PhD candidate in Government and Public Policy School at OP Jindal Global University, Sonepat. Prior to this, he was the Regional Cooperation Adviser to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan)