Bolsonaro lacks the balance that Lula possesses in abundance, and the people's Carnival exposed this.

By Mauro Lopes, columnist for 247 and member of Journalists for Democracy - The topic for this Monday is Bolsonaro's behavior during Carnival. He acted as if he had a machine gun in his hands (to stick with the favorite metaphors of Bolsonaro supporters, all involving phallic symbols, like guns). He remained silent on Carnival Saturday and only posted one tweet on Sunday. On Monday, however, he unleashed a veritable war.

It was a surprising sequence:

1. Four tweets on Monday morning, starting at 6:35 am, announcing the beginning of the persecutions in schools and universities across the country. He threatened students, teachers, and staff with an ideological Lava Jato operation and, in the messages, predicted that there would be resistance: "We know that this may lead to strikes and coordinated movements," clearly hinting at repression.here). 

2. On Carnival Tuesday, also in the morning (9:19 am), a crude attack was launched against Caetano Veloso and Daniela Mercury, to the point of saying that they are not even artists. It was his revenge against the music video "Proibido o Carnaval" (Carnival Forbidden) that the two had released at the beginning of February, defending freedom in Brazil's most popular festival and making a humorous critique of all Bolsonaro's ideology regarding civil rights and social morality, with a direct reference to the statement by Minister Damares Alves (of Women, Family and Human Rights) that boys should wear blue and girls pink. Daniela and Caetano sang: "Will you wear pink or will you wear blue?"here).

3. The peak came on Tuesday night when, at 20 pm, he posted an obscene video that caused shock in Brazil and abroad; in it, two revelers from the Blocu, in São Paulo, practiced the fetish called "golden shower" (which involves the act of urinating on one's partner). In his text, the then-president insinuated that these were common scenes in Brazilian Carnival: "This is what many street parties in Brazilian Carnival have become"here).

What is the reason for this succession of attacks? During the morning of this Ash Wednesday, there were two major lines of analysis regarding Bolsonaro's behavior, both with widespread support: one claiming he was "crazy," "mad," "insane," "unbalanced," or, on the contrary, that he was a "brilliant" strategist who, with his succession of posts and his conduct in general, was very thoughtfully creating and consolidating the conservative camp, bringing together neo-fascists, fundamentalists, and broad segments of the poor and middle classes terrified by the crisis. 

I disagree with both analyses. 

I believe that saying Bolsonaro is "crazy" or "insane" is a reactionary stance, placing those who utter it alongside all those who argue that society consists of "sane" and "mad" people, and that the latter group should be confined to asylums (psychiatric hospitals) and straitjackets. Such a characterization directed at Bolsonaro is profoundly mistaken, finding no basis in psychoanalytic or psychiatric literature. Who is "crazy"? Who is "sane"? And who establishes the division between "crazy" and "sane"? The right and the far-right are currently attempting to restore this false duality in the country to imprison those who are inconvenient, as recent measures from the Ministry of Health indicate. To say Bolsonaro is "insane" is, ultimately, to align oneself with them and tarnish the memory and the struggle of more than 30 years of the anti-psychiatric movement in the country. Bolsonaro, therefore, is not "crazy."

The assertion that everything is a brilliant strategy of the far-right, a recipe applied linearly in recent years in different countries and situations around the world, seems to me an exaggerated, forced interpretation. It attributes a "rationality" to the far-right to such an extent that it insinuates the existence of veritable laboratories of "political and social programming" scattered around the planet applying tests and theses, in an update of behaviorist thought. It seems to me that the political and social struggle is far more complex than that. In Brazil, many – even on the left – spent 2018 declaiming in prose and verse the "genius" of the far-right. Were they right here and elsewhere? Yes. But they "got it right" after decades of "being wrong," being a minority, and being repeatedly defeated. Read the history of Nazism if you want historical perspective. They suffered an enormous number of defeats and made mistakes before coming to power. The far-right is not brilliant. She is there and has found, in Brazil and other countries, an environment and situation in which there was an opportunity for them to finally emerge victorious. But it is a much more amateurish movement than they would have us believe. There is a much-vaunted "competence" that, more often than not, serves to disarm and discourage people on the left and those committed to justice and peace. 

We are seeing this now. If they were so "brilliant," why would the Bolsonaro government be going downhill less than 90 days after taking office? Why would they be experiencing successive, increasingly serious crises, caused—until Carnival—simply by themselves and their internal blunders and dissensions?

Bolsonaro is not crazy. Nor is he a genius. He has, and this is evident, an emotional balance far below what is required of someone in his position. And this is important. 

Compare Bolsonaro's emotional stability with Lula's.

There is a good criterion for assessing emotional balance: behavior in the face of crises in personal life or in government, as the case may be.

How did Lula react to the crises of his government? How did he react to the relentless campaign of persecution against him and his family for at least six years, a campaign that continues without a single day of respite? How did he react to the death of Marisa Letícia and, now, of his grandson Arthur? How did he react to his imprisonment? There is not a single word from Lula attacking his tormentors, no insults, no personal attacks, no name-calling. There is pride, serenity, and vigor, with moments of sadness, but never discouragement or depression.

Take Bolsonaro, for example. Words slip out of his control with enormous ease. Insults are always on the tip of his tongue, and he constantly harbors a desire for the death of his political adversaries and anyone he perceives as a threat. There is permanent tension, a fear of attacks; he and his sons see enemies everywhere. 

During Carnival, there was a clear shift in the emotional instability of Bolsonaro. Why? The easy popularity that has slipped through his fingers since his inauguration took on another dimension during Carnival: the people in the streets expressed their revulsion towards him and his government and enormous sympathy for Lula. 

This was the "tipping point": people in the streets. Bolsonaro couldn't handle it. It wasn't just the popular demonstration that shook him. To make matters worse (for him), the "green-and-yellow" shirts disappeared. The pro-Bolsonaro bloc that was announced in São Paulo didn't happen because nobody showed up; and even on social media, where the far-right seemed "unbeatable" to many, they became a clear minority in recent days. Even before Carnival, the repercussions of Arthur's death and the Silva family's tragedy highlighted the enormous isolation of Bolsonarism, represented by Eduardo Bolsonaro's hostile reaction; for every 86 comments of solidarity with Lula, there was only one of mockery.hereI suspect that when the surveys regarding the Carnival events are released, the indicators will be equally bad for Bolsonaro and his cronies.

Once again: compare Bolsonaro's reaction now to Lula's, when millions took to the streets to demand the coup in 2015-16. Does anyone remember any aggression or insults? There weren't any.

The people returned to the streets, for their celebration, not immediately to protest against Bolsonaro, it should be noted. But the message has radically changed. The era of exacerbated anti-PT sentiment among the middle classes has receded, or at least is returning to where it always was: far from the streets. The anger against the PT is subsiding, no matter how much the far-right fans the flames. After all, four years have passed since the coup, counting from the moment the elites brought the country to a standstill to overthrow Dilma; since then, everything has gone wrong, Juvenal. 

Neither is Bolsonaro "crazy" nor is the far-right endowed with a brilliant strategy. 

The far-right rode the wave of the political climate and popular dissatisfaction and, above all, frustration after 13 years of PT governments that ended amidst a severe recession and neoliberal remedies in a left-wing government. 

The tide is turning. Dissatisfaction and frustration are rapidly replacing expectations regarding the Bolsonaro government. The far-right is behaving clumsily in the face of this changing landscape, isolating itself more and more. 

The difference in political and emotional stature between Bolsonaro and Lula becomes more noticeable every day. 

On Friday, March 8th, women will lead the mobilization in the streets. How will Bolsonaro react? It's predictable. The political timeline of the far-right is dwindling much sooner than many projected.

He lacks emotional balance, and this will become increasingly apparent.  

The mobilized people terrify him. How about terrifying him even more? The 8th is just around the corner.