'The mainstream media can undermine politics'

Marco Weissheimer, On the 21 Between 60 and 70% of the food that the Brazilian population buys in markets today is controlled by a group of just ten companies. The production of most of these foods involves the use of pesticides, hormones, and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In search of a healthier life, the wealthiest are increasing their consumption of organic products. The poorest, who do not have access to organic products, continue to consume foods with pesticides, hormones, and GMOs without having access to information about what they are ingesting.

In this scenario, rural social movements decided to change their strategy for debating the importance of Agrarian Reform. “There is a great deal of awareness in society surrounding the issue of pesticides. When discussing pesticides and their effects on health and the environment, there is room to debate the importance of agrarian reform, agroecology, and the need to build another model of production and development,” says Marcelo Leal, a member of the State Coordination of Via Campesina, in an interview with Sul21. Eating, he argues, has become more than ever a political act. “Food has become a symbolic and material element to connect the countryside and the city.”

Marcelo Leal also speaks about the current political moment in the country and points to a window of opportunity in the conjunction of economic, political, and social crises. “This combination of crises opens a window, a historic opportunity for all forces to renegotiate alliances and positions. The issue of Political Reform via an Exclusive Constituent Assembly plays a central role here. This renegotiation will be programmatic, but it will take place in the streets.” He argues that the moment is “to have the debate with society, to be in the streets, to discuss politics with the people. If we don't do this, the large media groups, which want to dismantle politics, will take advantage of this moment. It's worth remembering what happened in Italy, where there was this media hegemony around the issue of corruption, which resulted in Berlusconi, causing the country to sink into an economic, political, and social crisis.”

Sul21: What were the main topics of the mobilization campaign that Via Campesina promoted this week in Porto Alegre, and what is the assessment of these activities?

Marcelo Leal: We decided to carry out this campaign at a national plenary session held last August, based on the understanding that, regardless of Dilma's re-election, in the agrarian field we had to define an agenda for struggle. So we scheduled this campaign for the beginning of March, taking advantage of the mobilizations around International Women's Day. We ended up being fortunate due to the circumstances. It coincided that other struggles would take place in that same week in a highly polarized political environment.

We tackled three main issues this week. First, the topic of violence against women and the need for state policies to address this violence. Second, the topic of pesticides and healthy food. Via Campesina decided that women should lead this debate. We noticed a great deal of awareness in society surrounding this issue. Wherever you bring up the topic of pesticides and their effects on health and the environment, there is room for debate not only on this issue, but on others related to it, such as the importance of agrarian reform, agroecology, and the need to build another model of production and development. The complaint we filed here in Rio Grande do Sul about companies that produce inputs for pesticides and the impact of these products on health and the environment had a great impact.

We intend to continue working on the issue of pesticides and, around it, have a broader debate on agroecology and agrarian reform. Following this agenda, we will discuss the peasant program focused on the production of healthy food and supplying it to the population, as well as the issue of energy.

Between 60 and 70% of the food that the Brazilian population buys in markets today is controlled by a group of just ten companies. The production of most of these foods involves the use of pesticides, hormones, and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Agribusiness has become a very powerful class pact that unites rural producers, food industries, and media groups. The food market today is configured in such a way that the rich are seeking to consume organic products, while the poor are left with products containing GMOs and pesticides. Eating is, today, a political act. Food has become a symbolic and material element connecting the countryside and the city.

Sul21: What is the status of the Agrarian Reform? This issue seems to have lost some visibility recently.

Marcelo Leal: We still have 150 families living in encampments in Brazil. Here in Rio Grande do Sul, there are 2.270 families encamped in the regions of Passo Fundo, Esmeralda, Charqueadas, Catuípe, and also in the southern region. We understand that society needs to debate the importance of a popular agrarian reform. We believe that one of the causes of the social crisis we are experiencing today is the failure to address the issues of urban reform and agrarian reform. It is in the interest of society that there be land distribution and a policy for the production of healthy food, for agroecology, and for the preservation of the environment. Agrarian reform today fulfills a series of other roles that are not only related to generating work and income for the settlers. It fulfills an environmental function and another of producing healthy food for the population. That is why we say that agrarian reform must become a popular debate. The quality of life of everyone is involved in this.

Sul21: What does the peasant program for food production that you mentioned earlier consist of?

Marcelo Leal: The peasant program is an achievement we had here in Rio Grande do Sul in 2013, during the Tarso government, which generated a kind of platform that we are seeking to nationalize. We have already had a meeting with the Minister of Agrarian Development, Patrus Ananias, to present this program. It structures an acceleration of the agroecological transition, moving beyond pilot experiences and seeking the massification of agroecology.

It structures food production, logistics, agro-industrialization, and even the supply of food to large urban centers and inland cities. It's a complete program. We are using it as a platform to think about a new generation of public policies for the agricultural sector, in the same way that Pronaf served, in the late 90s and more boldly in the early 2000s, to structure a set of public policies.

We believe that Pronaf has reached a point of exhaustion. It's a credit policy to promote agricultural production, but it has ended up being hijacked by the chemical and machinery industries. Today, it serves to finance the machinery, genetically modified, chemical fertilizer, and pesticide industries. From a role of promoting a new production model, it has been completely captured by the financial, chemical, and industrial systems.

Sul21: How exactly did this kidnapping happen?

Marcelo Leal: The program is a bank-based credit policy where farmers, to access it, must meet all the criteria required by the bank, according to the Basel Accords. Furthermore, it is heavily focused on structuring production chains that are closely linked to agribusiness. The financing ends up being directed to this sector. It's much easier to get financing to buy a tractor or for the production of pigs or transgenic corn than for an agroecological transition. It is in this sense that we say it has been hijacked. Today we have about 8 million families in rural areas, and only 1,4 million have access to Pronaf (National Program for Strengthening Family Farming).

We consider the peasant program as a successful experience that allows for a series of debates to be articulated around it. The focus is on food production, but surrounding it are themes such as the strengthening of cooperatives and social organizations, unbanked credit policies, agroecological transition, agro-industrialization, and value addition.

Sul21: Is this peasant program already being implemented in Rio Grande do Sul?

Marcelo Leal: Yes. The Tarso government allocated 100 million reais for the implementation of this program, which has already benefited around 8 families in the state, with soil recovery, greenhouses for agroecological transition, biological control, among other practices. It reduces bureaucracy in accessing credit, strengthens the cooperative system, and allows farmers to diversify production and make the agroecological transition.

Sul21: How receptive is the concept of agroecology among farmers, especially small and medium-sized farmers? What is stronger: resistance or support for this idea?

Marcelo Leal: There are still many difficulties in making the agroecological transition. The entire system of credit, production, and rural assistance is geared towards agrochemical production. There is a whole culture and education, for at least five generations, of buying the agrochemical package from agribusiness, even within small farms. It offers solutions for insects, weeds, everything. There is a lack of a state policy focused on agroecology in the same way that there was, in the early sixties, a state policy to make the conservative transition of agriculture, applying the package of the Green Revolution.

There is receptiveness among farmers, especially when the topic of health and nutrition is raised. Women play a leading role in food production. Young people have also shown great willingness to engage in this debate. But we need to move beyond pilot experiences and create the structural conditions to make the agroecological transition on a massive scale. With prospects for income, a structure for technical assistance, access to non-bank credit, strengthening of cooperatives, and qualified research in the scientific and technological fields, we believe it is possible to make the agroecological transition quickly.

Sul21: Returning to the topic of pesticides, is there any guidance or directive from Via Campesina that its members should not use pesticides on their land, or is that left to the discretion of each individual?

Marcelo Leal: In the settlements and communities where we are organized, we work towards an agroecological transition. But we can't prevent someone from using pesticides on their land. Furthermore, we have the problem of pesticide drift. We have entire communities that produce agroecologically but are surrounded by large farms that produce genetically modified corn and soy. The contamination of genetic material and pesticide drift ends up affecting the forest, the vegetables, the orchard. So, it's a very conflicting situation to make the agroecological transition today. Besides needing to restructure your own property, you may also face contamination from a neighbor.

Today we live with the use of prohibited, smuggled, and banned pesticides for certain crops. 2,4-D, for example, which CNTBio (Brazilian National Biodiversity Commission) approved for transgenic corn, remains in the soil for 30 years and causes fetal malformations, among other problems. They started using 2,4-D because the cultivation of glyphosate-resistant transgenic soybeans caused several plants to also become resistant to this product. So now it's necessary to use a stronger poison to kill these plants. Some of them will become resistant to 2,4-D, and then it will be necessary to apply a cocktail of pesticides, and so on. Their solution is to exacerbate the problem.

Sul21: How many families in Rio Grande do Sul are producing according to agroecological standards today?

Marcelo Leal: Today, within Via Campesina, we have over 12 families undergoing agroecological transition. This doesn't mean that all of them have organically certified properties. There are different stages coexisting. That's already a big step. But making this complete transition without a state policy is quite difficult.

Sul21: Let's talk a little about the current situation. How is Via Campesina viewing the current political moment in the country?

Marcelo Leal: The political coalition that came to power in 2003 and sustained a period of economic growth with a good deal of income redistribution has been progressively crumbling over the last four years, and last year it completely disintegrated. At this moment we have a combination of signs of economic crisis and a political crisis. This conjunction of crises, in our view, opens a window, a historic opportunity for all forces to renegotiate alliances and positions. To overcome the social crisis, it is necessary to address the issues of urban reform and agrarian reform.

In economic terms, we need to consider Brazil's industrialization combined with agrarian reform and the construction of food sovereignty and a new energy model. In other words, it means rethinking economic development.

In the political arena, we see strong signs of instability, especially in the representative system. Ten companies financed 70% of the elected representatives. This is a hijacking of politics and, for us, therein lies the root of corruption. Are these 70% of elected representatives representatives of the people or of these ten companies? To change this situation, we are advocating for an Exclusive Constituent Assembly to carry out political reform. If the crisis deepens, an Exclusive Constituent Assembly is the institutional solution that allows for deepening the democratic process, breaking with the power of money in elections, and creating channels for popular participation. Involving the people in the debate about the Constituent Assembly is a great mass education program.

This is, therefore, an opportune moment for social struggles. There is a more radicalized sector on the right that calls for impeachment and the return of the military. Another sector on the right, led by the PSDB, is represented in FHC's speech, who said that impeachment is not like changing shirts, that the Dilma government has social support and that civil society is very complex, etc. And we have the center and center-left sectors that defend the Dilma government. What is being disputed at this historical moment is the meaning of Brazil's development. It is a time to have a debate with society, to be in the streets, to discuss politics with the people. If we don't do this, the large media groups, which want to dismantle politics, will take advantage of this moment. It is worth remembering what happened in Italy, where there was this media hegemony around the issue of corruption, which resulted in Berlusconi, causing the country to sink into an economic, political, and social crisis.

Sul21: This agenda of political repact comes at a time when we have a more conservative Congress and the main party supporting the Dilma government, the PT, is weakened and on the defensive. Unions and, especially, social movements like the MST and Via Campesina have taken the lead in confronting this conservative wave, as seen in the demonstration held in Porto Alegre last week. This situation seems to place new demands on the social movements themselves, which are being called upon to engage in struggles that go beyond their specific agendas. How does Via Campesina view this situation?

Marcelo Leal: The rise of Lula's government in 2003 owes much to the work done by the PT (Workers' Party). The PT did a lot of good for the government, but the party was too dependent on the system of government, with negative repercussions on its organizational capacity. Today, the PT is weakened to lead the rise in social mobilization that we need. On the other hand, the government is promoting fiscal adjustments, more in line with neoliberal logic, to face the signs of economic crisis. This puts the PT even more on the defensive, since the platform of the PT's discourse is based on economic growth, income generation, and income distribution through social policies. With the fiscal adjustment being made, the State will lose some of its structure to deepen social policies.

On the other hand, social movements have spent the last 12 years on a resistance agenda. The social policies achieved appeared to society and the popular classes much more as a concession from the government than as a conquest of social struggle. This has somewhat miseducated the people about engaging in social struggles. We maintained a resistance agenda defending our causes, which allowed for a certain organizational reserve and social strength that can now lead these social struggles. We saw this in the event held here in Rio Grande do Sul. Via Campesina placed its most historical agenda around food sovereignty and agrarian reform and joined other social forces. The MST, the movements that make up Via Campesina, and the CUT, especially the metallurgical and oil sectors, can form a large alliance to advance the defense of labor rights, agrarian reform, and food sovereignty, but they must have a political banner that goes beyond those of their respective categories. The theme of Political Reform via an Exclusive Constituent Assembly appears there. This renegotiation will be programmatic, but it will take place in the streets.