Party Funding tarnishes the honor of the Brazilian Congress.

There is nothing more despicable in the Brazilian political structure than the existence of the so-called Party Fund. Brazilian society is unaware of this, or has not even fully grasped this cancer instituted in favor of party aristocracies that use the Fund to enrich themselves with public money from the electoral offices they have acquired through fraudulent signatures of phantom voters, which form the basis of rent-seeking parties.

The existence of a Party Fund has no moral, democratic, or even political basis. What sense does it make for society as a whole to direct public money to parties that are, as the name suggests, a part of it? What sense is there in financing the part by the whole, which is constituted by the sum of the parts? What is the purpose of the Fund's money? Is it to allow a part of society, the party, to seize overall political power? But isn't that a contradiction? And are the other parties also financed to seize total power?

At this moment when all the structures of the Republic—Executive, Legislative, and Judicial—are being crushed by the discredit and lack of respect from public opinion, it is fundamental that at least a faction emerges in Congress, where the final political decisions are made, that raises the need to abolish the Fund and compels the others, through a moral steamroller, to follow the same path.

To say that the Party Fund is an instrument of democracy is a deception. In reality, it is nothing more than a bureaucratic tool manipulated by party aristocracies that manipulate the country's electoral system in their favor. Some time ago, Lula said that Congress had about 300 crooks. With the Party Fund in effect, practically all congressmen legally become crooks.

If the desired political reform does not eliminate the Party Fund – which congressmen shamelessly decided, a few weeks ago, to increase to more than R$ 800 million per year – it will be an open confession of unsuitability. But how could a group of people, shielded by the anonymity of a larger body, make a decision that, in theory, would contradict their own interests, even if those interests are hidden?

My suggestion is that society create a mechanism of pressure so that the congressmen themselves, or at least the majority of them, make a decision favorable to decency in this case. I myself do not have the internet skills, and even less the notoriety, to gain millions of followers in a campaign against the Fund. Therefore, I ask internet users more competent than I and moved by the same indignation to use tools such as Facebook or Twitter, or both, to mobilize millions in order to bring the parliamentarians, as Gramsci said, to a position (against the Fund) from which they can only retreat with dishonor.