Bolsonaro's speech signals a permanent war against opponents of the regime.

In his inaugural speeches at Congress and in the Parlatório of the Palácio do Planalto, Bolsonaro opted for a rhetoric of war.

It is unlikely that it was an accidental or reckless choice. The greater probability, instead, is that political calculation and strategic planning lay behind this choice.

Theoretically, Bolsonaro would lose more than he would gain with this hateful and aggressive preaching in his very first act as president. As a rule, every government that assumes power naturally counts on a truce and relative initial restraint from the press, society, and even the opposition.

To disregard this premise, and in the blatant manner shown in the speech and the disregard for the press, theoretically benefits the opposition and harms the government.

Bolsonarism, however, calculates that reiterating the campaign's war rhetoric acts as a magnet that draws its followers, many of whom are fanatical and willing to engage in militia-like practices, into the fight against the enemy embodied in social movements, symbols, policies, and progressive, socialist, and left-wing parties.

In front of fanatics who followed the speech at the Planalto Palace shouting "Myth, Myth" [in the 1920s in Italy, the masses cheered Mussolini as "Duce, Duce"], Bolsonaro promised, to the delight and general trance of his followers: "Our flag will never be red! It will only be red if our blood is needed to keep it green and yellow."

A permanent war against opponents of the regime will be the strategy of this far-right government with clearly fascist tendencies.

The scenario that is unfolding calls for much struggle, much political and social unity to resist McCarthyism and persecution, the restriction of freedom of the press and expression, and especially the establishment of violence, repression, and state terror against citizens and popular organizations.

It is only through brutal repression and the annihilation of the opposition that the regime will be able to quell the people's resistance to the setbacks and dismantling already seen in the decrees of the government's first day.

The implementation of the ultraliberal program is not viable in democratic contexts; it requires a dictatorial environment and a strong deficit of democracy, as happened in Pinochet's Chile.

For the establishment, overcoming the distributive conflict exacerbated by the crisis of capitalism in 2008 presupposes

[1] the breakdown of the 1988 social pact – hence the coup and the establishment of the state of exception with Lava Jato;

[2] a new pact of bourgeois domination, which materializes in a program executed by any government in which distributive and social equality policies do not fit – hence the imperative of the legal farce against Lula, and

[3] the consensus, within the ruling classes, that ultraliberal savagery is the prescribed remedy for the current stage of peripheral capitalism in Brazil.

This is no trivial matter. This new pact of bourgeois domination devastates the national economy, transfers wealth, reserves, and public assets to foreign capital, deepens unemployment and recession, and turns Brazil into a South American consulate of the USA. In short, it's a program that rhymes with authoritarianism, subservience, and neocolonialism.