Maria do Rosário: We are at a historical crossroads.

By Miguel do Rosário, editor-in-chief of Coffee

The Brazilian political landscape seems to be heading towards the end of a turbulent cycle and the beginning of another, also marked by turmoil and uncertainty, with the coup practically consolidated and the imminent definitive removal of elected President Dilma Rousseff.

To better understand this scenario and the possible new directions for the left, O Cafezinho spoke with federal deputy Maria do Rosário. In the interview, the deputy does not hold back in her criticism of her party, the PT, for neglecting the organization of its base before the coup was underway, discusses the architecture of the coup, and the need for unity on the left, regardless of party affiliations.

O Cafezinho: Congresswoman, impeachment is now a very real possibility, and even though Eduardo Cunha has been removed from the presidency of the Chamber of Deputies, he is still an influential figure, isn't he?

Maria do Rosário: Eduardo Cunha lost the presidency, but maintained great influence within the Chamber of Deputies, so much so that he managed to repeatedly delay his effective removal from office. But look: at the same time that he lost ground within the Chamber, he gained a government, because the acting president is a hostage of Eduardo Cunha and fulfills an agenda that he has to agree to. In my opinion, Temer is trying to consolidate greater autonomy in relation to Cunha, but he will continue to be a hostage because this coup was costly. It is costly to the country, but it is also costly to the machinations they have produced over this time.

Recently, I saw a news report that PSDB leaders were increasing their criticism of the Temer government because it was implementing unpopular measures, which was more or less what had been agreed upon. Don't you think that perhaps the fact that it's not a legitimate government, that it doesn't have to answer to an electorate, makes the blow harder in this sense, as it opens the door for a PSDB to later pretend to be benevolent?

MR: It's a concrete possibility. In my assessment, the coup is structured around contradictions between the political forces coordinating it, especially regarding the strategy they intend for the country. The power struggle continues, with the class and segment representations that each one considers their own. But the coup government comes to power, to this position of governing the country at this moment, already with a very well-structured strategy, which doesn't seem to originate from Michel Temer's mind, or from the minds of one or the other. There are measures they tried to implement within Dilma's government, projects they tried to produce, extremely conservative ones, within Dilma's government. Other structural measures concerning the State are being voted on now. So, this is impressive: how there is a strategy designed by the coup plotters, because while the Senate is debating the definitive removal of President Dilma, without any reason for it, therefore, in a coup-like situation, in the Chamber there are already projects and constitutional amendments being debated and proposals announced that will alter the structure of the Brazilian State for 20 years. We can talk about the renegotiation of the debt through PLP 257, we can structurally cite PEC 241 (which establishes 20 years without new investments, 20 years of fiscal adjustment exclusively serving rentiers, banks, and the appropriation of resources by the richest in this country), and we can also cite the change in the regulatory framework of the pre-salt oil fields and the already announced reforms: labor and social security. This didn't happen after Temer arrived at the Planalto Palace. This is something thought out, structured, planned. Only those who fail to perceive this think this coup is something improvised. There is no improvisation among the elites. Perhaps the improvisation lies in our resistance on the left, which we need, especially in the leadership of the PT, a greater capacity to organize these important bases that the party has throughout Brazil to participate in the struggle. And that is what the national leadership of the PT is not doing today.

Regarding this non-parliamentary, non-union, non-partisan activity, what we call the social left, which proved significant in the resistance to the coup. Here in Rio de Janeiro, we had very large demonstrations against the coup. But precisely that: there is a lack of organization or a broader debate in this regard. Now, with this coup practically consolidated, what are the paths outside of parliament in which the left should organize itself, what proposals do you have in this regard for the Workers' Party and for the left in general?

MR: The PT (Workers' Party), even with all the difficulties, continues to be an essential party for the country because of its social base, its national representation, and its national development project. Even though some sectors have distanced themselves, we need to recover this on new foundations. It's not just about going back to the past, but about understanding that political relations require greater horizontality and that the Workers' Party itself has a greater responsibility in confronting this political crisis than all other organizations, due to the degree of hegemony and political strength, the political command as a power strategy that it has built over the last few years. So, what I see is that the fronts have played an exceptional role. The Popular Brazil Front, the People Without Fear Front, the social movements play an exceptional role, but political leadership within the party structure is also needed that is up to the task. We are not allowed, and I don't believe it would be fair for us, who live within the institutional spaces, to demand or think that society did not react. Society reacted even beyond what we offered it as a possibility to continue trusting in our project. She took to the streets, even with criticisms of President Dilma's government, even observing the limits, society understood, a significant portion of society opposed the right wing that had also gained social strength in Brazil. This social force of the right wing found a very strong counterpoint in the democratic dimension of society. What was not up to this is that these spaces do not arise spontaneously. It is necessary that this great popular force of people going to the streets be complemented, have continuity through the actions of the leadership of the political parties. So, to the extent that there is a lack of leadership, there is a lack of conditions (especially here, I really criticize ourselves who are from the PT - we failed to contribute by offering paths of direction, both during President Dilma's government and at the present moment in offering alternatives for the continuity and deepening of this popular struggle).

Municipal elections are a more traditional type of mobilization, but they will play a role. The right wing thought we were finished, but we're not. We have very well-established candidates on the left who will be competing for a project. And what I see is that the next period demands that we transcend our own party labels and work more as a left wing.

Brazil has one of the harshest judicial systems in the world. It has the third largest prison population globally, an abuse of pretrial detention, and now we see this type of abuse – which was always used against the poor – being used for political manipulation with great ease, and society readily accepts it. We also criticize the PT (Workers' Party), which throughout this time did not promote a debate in this regard and is now a victim of it as well: several leaders being imprisoned without due process, and now even President Dilma is engulfed in this type of process, and it is very difficult to dispute this in public opinion. Any kind of debate on human rights in this sense is portrayed as defending criminals. How do you argue against this?

MR: This moment of institutional political coup, parliamentary coup, involving different institutions... it's more appropriate, in fact, to speak of a coup of an institutional nature. We have a parliamentary aspect, an aspect in the judiciary, actions in the Public Prosecutor's Office, various initiatives within the institutions, which break with democracy and with the vote at the ballot box, create instability regarding the election results and the certainty that those elected can govern. This current moment, therefore, has previous initiatives. And what preceded this? It was precisely the attack on human rights, on individual guarantees, this permanent tension to create a culture of persecution and hatred in the country, of instrumentalizing institutions for political interests. This is not new in Brazil, but every time institutions organize themselves in this way and are instrumentalized by certain political forces, regimes of exception are inaugurated. And we are already living under a regime of exception. A regime that, for some, means having no defense. Being a member of the PT (Workers' Party) means having no possibility of defending oneself today. Being on the left means having no possibility of defending oneself. There is no equal defense. Therefore, there is no effective democratic rule of law in the country when we observe that certain people, simply because they belong to an organization, are treated a priori as part of a criminal organization. The PT (Workers' Party) is a party that is being persecuted, so much so that Minister Gilmar Mendes is not ashamed to say that he aims for the annulment of the PT, and he is a Supreme Court Justice. We are therefore facing an authoritarian movement in the country. The position of Supreme Court Justice does not give him the right to attack the democratic freedoms of the country. To advocate for the annulment of a political party, for the impediment of the freedom of party organization, is to seek a state of exception.

So, how I defend ourselves against this is that we are in a moment of strong polarization, where compromising in the face of attacks from within or outside institutions, but which have an authoritarian character, is to break with the defense of democracy, and this generation cannot do that. We have to be willing to fight for it. We will not have the strength to make this movement for the defense of democracy only within the institutions. We need mobilized streets, we need autonomous movements; we could not have allowed a law on terrorism to proceed, which ended up encompassing social movements in Brazil. That is why I say that within our government there were also initiatives that put us in a difficult situation. Initiatives where we tried to include amendments within the project to remove social movements from it; we did our part. But how does the judiciary use this law today if it is not against the popular struggle? So I think we are at a historical crossroads in Brazil, where there is no right to naiveté, nor to political arrogance. No field of the left has the complete solution. We must act as a united front, unifying our fighting spirit with the social movement and transforming our mandates, wherever we may be, and our participation in societal spaces into spaces of resistance and confrontation.