Janine Jackson interviewed Maria Luisa Mendonça about Brazil’s presidential crisis for the June 2, 2017, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.
Janine Jackson: When Brazil’s elected president Dilma Rousseff was ousted last year by political opponents in what many called a parliamentary coup—as she was impeached, ostensibly for corruption, after being cleared by a special prosecutor—some US media presented the fight as “the people versus the president.” “Politicians know how to read society pretty well, and they can sense that the people want her out,” a think tank source was quoted in the New York Times. The deep unpopularity and evident corruption of Rousseff’s opponents, including current President Michel Temer—recently highlighted with smoking-gun tape recordings—now have the Times suggesting that Brazil’s problems have to do with it being a “turmoil-prone nation.”
Maria Luisa Mendonça: “If you dismantle basic services, that is not good for the economy. But, of course, this is the mantra that mainstream media use.”
We’re joined now by Maria Luisa Mendonça. She’s coordinator of the Network for Social Justice and Human Rights in Brazil, and director of the Feminist Alliance for Rights at the Center for Women’s Global Leadership at Rutgers University. She joins us now by phone from New Jersey. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Maria Luisa Mendonça.
Maria Luisa Mendonça: Thank you very much.
JJ: Well, maybe it’s too simple to say, but the latest scandal, involving tapes of Temer and former Sen. Aecio Neves talking about bribes with the head of the food empire JBS—they lend credence to what many said, that one of the real purposes of impeachment was to stop investigation into just those sorts of actions.
MLM: Yes, because there were actually no charges of corruption against President Dilma. They accused her of using a practice in dealing with the federal budget that was a very common practice, used by all presidents before her, so they had to come up with an excuse to impeach her, and that’s why we called this a parliamentary coup.
And the main reasons for the impeachment were, first of all, to stop investigations of corruption; now we have the most corrupt politicians in power, that are facing very serious accusations of corruption. And also to implement austerity measures, cuts in social programs, dismantling the pension system, labor laws. Those changes were rejected by voters, so the only way for them to implement those measures was to impeach President Dilma and establish an illegitimate government, and this is what we have now in Brazil.
JJ: Well, let me read you this from just over a week ago, May 19, the New York Times’ Simon Romero:
New York Times (5/19/17)
Just a few days ago, Brazil seemed to be turning a corner. The stock market was soaring. Bankers were cheering. The nation’s cutthroat lawmakers were lining up to curb spending. Inflation had been tamed.
Brazil, it appeared, was finally on the mend.
Then, in a matter of hours, it all started falling apart.
So cheering bankers and cutting spending is Brazil being “on the mend,” in this view, and it’s only evidence of corruption, when that spoils it, that then we have instability. You’re saying quite the opposite of that, that in fact it was these austerity measures that have been driving public protests.
MLM: Yes, exactly. I don’t understand why not giving job security and dismantling the pension system, retirement plans—I don’t understand how that would create a more stable society. And even for the economy, if you dismantle basic services, that is not good for the economy. But, of course, this is the mantra that mainstream media use, and we hear this over and over again.
JJ: Yes, a more recent piece talked about how the Brazilian economy “has not responded as vigorously to Mr. Temer’s proposed austerity measures as his supporters had hoped.” Well, yes, I guess that’s one way of putting it.
So a number of things have driven protests, but then, the government response to protests has been especially repressive, has it not?
MLM: Yes. We have seen severe repression. And just about a week ago, there was a large demonstration in the capital, Brasilia, and Temer actually called the army forces to occupy the city. And several people were hurt, there were shots with rubber bullets, but also one person was shot by the police. And also, in the countryside, there have been dozens of killings of peasants, and just also last week, there was a massacre in the state of Pará in the Amazon, and ten peasants were killed. So we have been seeing increasing repression in the countryside and also in urban areas.
JJ: Let’s talk about going forward. US media outlets tell a pretty crude story about Brazil, in a way. It’s, you know, they had this previously corrupt or malfeasant government, and now the new one’s corrupt too; it’s as though there’s just a cultural tendency toward chaos. And it tends to skip right over what kind of progress people are asking for. The protests that we’re seeing right now are not just anti-Temer; they’re really pro-democracy protests.
MLM: Yes, exactly. People are demanding direct elections, and they’re also demanding Temer to stop those measures that would undermine workers rights, basic rights. Those are the main demands.
And it’s very important for people to know that, because of media manipulation in Brazil, the majority of people, they don’t really understand the reasons for the impeachment. There were no accusations of corruption against President Dilma, they couldn’t find any case against her. So they used something that was very technical, that most people didn’t understand. It was a mechanism that she was delaying payments from the federal budget to public banks in order to subsidize interest rates for low-income housing and for agriculture. And those types of mechanisms have been used for decades in all previous governments.
But most people don’t even understand the reason for the impeachment, and of course, the mainstream media, also, they don’t talk about this. So the idea is that there was this scandal in Brazil, and the only reason for the economy to improve was to get rid of President Dilma. So that was the message that Brazilian society was targeted with, there was this message saying that the only way to improve the country was to have a change in government. And that, of course, is undermining democracy, because millions of people voted for her. She was elected and re-elected. So even if we don’t agree with her policies, we cannot just impeach a president because we don’t agree with her policies. You need to have a specific crime that would justify the impeachment. That’s why we call this a parliamentary coup.
JJ: Well, let me just ask you, finally, is there concern that even if Temer steps down or is removed, that what might happen next might be something other than direct elections?
MLM: Yes, exactly. So one possibility is that the Brazilian congress would choose the next president, but two-thirds of congressmembers have also been facing corruption charges. So that’s why we have been seeing large demonstrations asking for direct elections. I think this is the only way to restore democracy in Brazil.
JJ: We’ve been speaking with Maria Luisa Mendonça of the Network for Social Justice and Human Rights in Brazil, and the Feminist Alliance for Rights at the Center for Women’s Global Leadership at Rutgers University. Maria Luisa Mendonça, thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.
MLM: Thank you very much.
