Fernando Brito: Ciro makes a mistake that could be fatal to him.
Journalist Fernando Brito, editor of Tijolaço, states that PDT presidential candidate Ciro Gomes failed to fulfill his "duty of political honesty" in an interview with American Quarterly magazine: "That of recognizing and proclaiming that no one, and even less so a leader of Lula's stature, can be removed from the electoral race," says Brito; "He is making a mistake that could be fatal to him, because it provokes resentment and hinders what would be natural, should Lula's disqualification be confirmed."
By Fernando Brito, from brick - Ciro Gomes is a politician who inspires those who brought from Brizolism the unconventionality, the lack of fear of stepping outside of "political correctness," of empty statements that always follow the ritual of "white sheep," always the same and meek.
But, unlike Brizola, Ciro occasionally slips up with statements that are contradictory or, worse, empty.
He says, in a controversial interview... American Quarterly that “Brazil does not need and cannot tolerate a left-wing government. Brazil needs a project that brings together the practical interests of those who produce and the practical interests of those who work.”
It's not absurd at all (except for the "tolerate," which is subjective and vague enough to be read as "does not tolerate" or "it couldn't be like that"). After all, wasn't Lula's government, as Ciro argues, "a project that brings together the practical interests of those who produce and the practical interests of those who work"?
Yes, and even then the Brazilian elites didn't swallow the "bearded toad," just as they didn't digest Getúlio, Jango, Brizola, or anyone else who sought to combine development with social justice.
Ciro cannot understand this and, for this reason, the harshness of his criticisms of Lula, at a time when he is imprisoned and defenseless, ends up sounding – and not without reason – like music to the ears of those who cannot imagine that the former president could run in the elections. This would be understandable if he were running under normal conditions, as a way to capture a less solid Lula electorate, but not in the current circumstances.
In those cases, he knows that his chances only exist because Lula is on the verge of having his right to be voted for revoked.
Ciro, who likes to proclaim his personal honesty – which is not, or should not be, an extraordinary merit – is not fulfilling the first duty of political honesty: that of recognizing and proclaiming that no one, and even less so a leader of Lula's stature, can be removed from the electoral race.
He is making a mistake that could be fatal to him, because it provokes resentment and hinders what would be natural if Lula's disqualification is confirmed.
Furthermore, in the rest of his interview, Ciro says "heresies" that cause him to be rejected by the right wing, such as reaffirming that the pre-salt oil fields handed over by the Temer government are sufficient to assert a "left-wing" position – even though it is merely a defense of the national interest.
To be even slightly nationalistic in this country is an unforgivable sin.
Regarding Lula, however, instead of the image of courage that he always tries to project, what comes across is weakness, due to his unwillingness to confront the issue of the former president's release, a taboo as significant as any other that the ruling classes seek to instill in Brazilians.
If he always makes a point of giving "ammunition" to intrigue Lula's electorate, he can't complain if he isn't recognized by those he doesn't yet have: the 30% of the electorate who want to vote for the former president but may not be able to, due to the dictatorship of the media and the judiciary.