Brazil's Protests: What's Next?

Now that numerous cities have decided to cancel transportation fare hikes as a result of the protests, the question remains if Brazil's protests will find a new course, and if they will have a long-term impact.

A developed country isn't one where the poor drive cars, but where the rich use public transportation.

There's a lot in the media, both domestic and international, that Brazilians surprised political leaders with the demonstrations. But the truth is, I think they surprised themselves. After putting up with so much for so long, the spell was finally broken: the spell of bread and circuses, of soccer and novelas. They were capable all along of putting aside the homem cordial and the culture of compromise, and turning daily complaints into action. When police attacked innocent people, and importantly, members of the media, it was the final straw.

The shift in public opinion was swift, and critically, even Globo--the dominant news network--changed its tune to some degree. And attempts by soccer heroes Pelé and Ronaldo to appeal to protesters by telling people to "forget" the protests and saying that the World Cup cannot be held in hospitals, have backfired spectacularly in a testament to how deeply people relate to demonstrators' demands.

Until now, complaining has served as one of the most common outlets for dealing with realities like high crime, corruption, and poor public services. "Wake up, Brazil!" was a frequent lament. A typical example is that of a viral video earlier this month featured a Brazilian visiting the United States and noting the differences in prices and quality of life. It made a lot of people angry, though it also garnered fans, too. In the video, he complains Brazilians "fight for stupid rights, but don't fight for the basics, like the right to health, quality of life." While one can argue that no rights are "stupid," these protests have certainly brought things back to the basics.

A copa e a olimpíada já tem seu grande legado: a enorme capacidade de mobilização da sociedade.

— Marcelo Freixo (@MarceloFreixo) June 20, 2013

But now, many wonder where this is going, especially given that leaders conceded on bus fares in the country's two biggest cities that saw the largest protests. And with an explosion of international coverage, there seem to be more questions than answers.

Here, I think, are some of the important questions to think about going forward.

There's so many things wrong that they don't fit on a sign

Will this morph into a movement, or something more concrete? Will it translate, for example, into votes during next year's election?

Maybe, maybe not. But perhaps that matters less than people think. The fact that the protests have started a dialogue means there's a chance that Brazilians have a greater stake in public policy moving forward, and that maybe government accountability--sometimes woefully lacking--will improve. By talking about the varied demands of protesters, there's a chance more people will feel they have a greater stake in what's happening in politics. “Democracy is noise,” wrote Vladimir Safatle, a philosophy professor at the University of São Paulo, in Folha this week. “Those who like silence prefer dictatorships.”

On his blog, Carioca Roberto Cassano wrote that it doesn't matter that protesters don't have unified demands, or a leader. "We've created a collective Batman," he wrote, "of whose mere memory of sudden attacks and bat wings make the bad guys think twice." Politicians will now have the symptoms of those who have had their homes broken into, Cassano said. (And in a way, they did, given the protest on the roof of Congress.) They'll always be wondering if it could happen again.

Also, given that the protests did have a concerte result with a reduction in transportation fares in numerous cities, it sets a precedent that stimulates new demands, said Maurício Santoro, a Rio-based advisor to Amnesty International.

Curioso para ver efeito da redução de tarifa. Creio que não esvarizará protesto: ao estabelecer precedente, estimulará novas reivindicações.

— Maurício Santoro (@msantoro1978) June 19, 2013

What does this mean for Brazilian politics?

Designs by Isabela Rodrigues. Click to enlarge.

It means that not only do individual politicians need to regroup in the short-term, but political parties may need to try to build more concrete, action-based platforms ahead of next year's elections, rather than depending on charismatic leaders. "For decades, the military dictatorship forced political groups into a two-party system," wrote Brazilian journalist Mauricio Savarese on his blog. "It still takes its toil on our democracy. That is because leaders still seem to be much more important than sets of ideas—that is how politicians would stand out in the middle of the crowd then." It also means that despite historically high approval ratings, President Dilma Rousseff may have more formidable contenders next year.

On the other hand, some still doubt the protests present a threat to political parties and leaders. "At least for now, the movement appears to be far more 'Occupy Wall Street' than 'Arab Spring' in terms of its motives, demographics and likely outcome," says the latest from Reuters.

What does this mean for the rest of Latin America?

One of the really interesting things about the protests is that it has interesting implications for the acclaimed Lula model. Many outsiders perceive Brazil as a success story, not only for the region but for the world: low unemployment, rising wages, reduced inequality, lots of foreign investment, and a growing middle class. In spite of rising inflation and sluggish growth, the overall big picture has been a good one in recent years. Much of Latin America has tended to look to Brazil as the star of the region, and to Lula as the inspiration for leaders, combining social inclusion with business-friendly policies. "The ascent of the middle class, combined with social programs promoted by President Dilma Rousseff and her predecessor, Luiz Inacio 'Lula' Da Silva, seemed secure," said a Bloomberg piece today. If voters take heed that Lula's policies--continued by Dilma--worked to lift people out of poverty but ultimately failed to address long-neglected problems like public services and high levels of violence, what does that mean for other Latin American countries following this model? It's particularly interesting for countries like Peru and Colombia that have also had economic growth with Lula-esque leaders, working on policies to benefit the poor but also attracting foreign businesses, but struggling with some similar challenges.

"What are the chances that Brazil's protests spread to another country? Before you answer "zero," take some time to think about it.

 

— boz (@bloggingsbyboz) June 18, 2013

Images: Social media, Isabela Rodrigues.

Comments

[mallory]

what else could happen other than hopefully changing the way people view voting responsibility? i hope it has a long term effect on the way individuals act in society, honest elected officials can only come from honest voters. one thing that i've been seeing around the internet is "boycott the worldcup!!!" which makes no sense. the problem is not the worldcup. if it were, it would have been criticized four years ago when FIFA awarded the bid. there are too many people clinging to sensationalism without any real clue or idea of what could be the possible results. I had a friend on facebook write to me, "stop being so cynical, it doesn't matter why they are protesting, what matters is that they are doing it." .....isn't the "why" the whole purpose? I understand that a "protesting brazilian" is a phenomenon, but beyond that there has to be a realistic goal. is the goal blankly to tell the government to stop being corrupt? and if so, how is this achieved? through responsible voting? i wonder, if voting were made optional, would there be less voting fraud and purchased votes...?

[Ian Nieves]

I'd be shocked if Brazil's protests and the strident demands for improvement they embody didn't spark conflagrations in Argentina and Venezuela. The same years that witnessed Brazil's feverish progress have seen Argentina, historically the flagship of Latin American prosperity, slide into financial ruin under the sequential onslaught of Fascism, Socialism and Globalization. If Brazilians bemoan frustrated aspirations, consider the plight of Argentines!! Now think of Venezuelans, who endure far greater poverty and misery than Either Brazilians or Argentines, and who've been radicalized and inflamed by the incessant rabble-rousing propaganda of the Chavez regime. And then there's Castro's dirt poor island gulag smoldering with acrid bitterness from decades of privation and tyranny...

It seems quite likely to me that the Brazilian protests could play a role in Latin America comparable to those of Tunisia in the Arab World. If so, in both cases discontent in comparative regional economic flowers would have ignited explosive dissent and outright rebellion in neighbors racked by abject misery and oppression and ripe for conflagration. Che Guevara lived too soon and wielded the wrong sorts of weapons..

[marcelo]

"...what does that mean for other Latin American countries following this model"...

Gringa, have you heard of the Foro de Sao Paulo and its agenda to Latin America?