Lula says the media never profited as much as it did during the Lula era.

247 - Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is today the number one enemy of major national media groups, especially Abril and Globo, but there is a paradox in this. It was during the government of the working-class president that these companies managed to get out of the hole and resolve their foreign exchange debts – cursed legacies of the FHC government.

Lula, however, never received any signs of gratitude for having personally engaged in rescuing the media groups. This tense relationship between the politician and the media is one of the themes of the long interview he gave to sociologist Emir Sader, which will be released in the book "Post-Liberal Governments in Brazil: Lula and Dilma" on May 13th.

Below are some of the main excerpts from Lula's interview:

What is your assessment of the years of government by the PT and its allies?

These years, if not the best, are part of the best period this country has experienced in many, many years. If we analyze the deficiencies that still exist, the vital needs of a people often forgotten by their rulers, we will realize that much remains to be done to guarantee this people the full achievement of citizenship. But, if we analyze what has been done, we will realize that other countries have not managed, in thirty years, to do what we have managed to do in ten years. We broke taboos and preconceived notions established by some economists, some sociologists, some historians. Some truths were shattered. First, we proved that it was entirely possible to grow while distributing income, that it was not necessary to wait for growth to distribute. Second, we proved that it was possible to increase wages without inflation. In the last 10 years, organized workers have had real increases: [...] the minimum wage increased by almost 74% and inflation was controlled. Third, during this decade we increased our foreign trade and our domestic market without this resulting in conflict. They used to say it wasn't possible to grow both the external and internal markets simultaneously. Those were some of the taboos we broke. And, at the same time, we did something I consider extremely important: we proved that a little money in the hands of many means income distribution, and a lot of money in the hands of a few means income concentration.

(…)

When the government began, you must have had an idea of ​​what it would be like. What has changed from that initial idea, what has been accomplished and what has not been accomplished, and why?

We had a program, and it seemed like it wasn't moving forward. I remember Minister Luiz Furlan, every time he had a meeting, would say: "We've been in government for so many days, there are only so many days left until the end, and we need to define what we want to have happened at the end of the term. What is the picture we want to have?" And I would say: "Furlan, the picture is being taken." It's not possible to be in a hurry to get results. We have to prove, at the end of a term, whether we were able to do what we set out to do. If we work based on newspaper headlines, it seems like we do everything and end up doing nothing.

So here's the thing: I planted a jaboticaba tree. If that tree grows healthy, there will always be someone saying, "But Lula, it's not producing jaboticaba, it's taking too long." If I cut the tree down and plant something else, I'll never have jaboticaba. So, I have to believe that if I fertilize it correctly, that tree will produce quality jaboticaba. And I cited these examples in government... Soybeans have to wait 120 days, beans have to wait 90 days. There's no point in constantly repeating, "I planted it a week ago and it hasn't sprouted." You have to be patient. I think I was the president who pronounced the word "patience" the most... Otherwise, you go crazy.

There are people in politics who get up in the morning, read the newspaper, and want to respond to it. And then they do nothing else. I wasn't elected to spend all my time responding to newspapers. I was elected to govern a country. And that gave me enough peace of mind to see that the government program would be fulfilled.

(…)

When did you lose your temper?

Obviously, we had problems at the beginning. Do you think it's easy for a metalworker to sit in that chair where so many other personalities, whom I saw on television and thought were more important than me, have sat... And the same goes for sleeping in the room where so many important people have slept, or who, at least according to public opinion, are important. And I kept thinking: "Is it really true that I'm here?"

At first, I was very anxious. "Will we be able to do this? Will it be possible?" I wondered. I think we did it. With mistakes and a lot of tension, but we did it.

(…)

We had setbacks, of course. Many setbacks. The year 2005 was very complicated. When the accusation came out, it was a very delicate situation. If we hadn't been careful, we wouldn't have discussed anything about the future anymore, only what the press wanted us to discuss. One day, I came home and said: "Marisa, from today on, if we want to govern this country, we're not going to watch television, we're not going to look at magazines, we're not going to read newspapers." I started having half an hour of conversation a day with the press office to see what the news was [...], but I couldn't accept getting up in the morning, turning on the television and already being contaminated. So I think that was a very important factor.

I had a team and we created a situation room, which included Dilma, Ciro [Gomes], Gilberto [Carvalho] and Márcio [Thomaz Bastos]. And it was very funny: I would arrive at the Palace and they were all nervous. And I was calm and I would say: "You see? You read the newspaper... Why are you nervous?".

(…)

You were born radicals...

The Workers' Party (PT) was very rigid, and it was this rigidity that allowed it to get where it got. However, when a party grows a lot, all kinds of people join. In other words, when you decide to create a democratic and mass party, a lamb or a jaguar can join, but the party will come to power.

So, our rise to power wasn't seen by them as a beneficial alternation of power for democracy, not as something normal: there was a dispute, whoever won, whoever won takes over, whoever won governs, and that's the end of it. Isn't that right? They didn't see it that way. I mean, I was an unwanted guest who got there. You know that guy who's invited to a party, and the host didn't even invite him properly. He says, "If you want, come by." And you go and the guy says, "Did this guy believe that?" So, we went to the party, and what's worse, we were right.

And then, they tried to use the Mensalão scandal to destroy the PT and, obviously, to end my government. At the time, there were people saying: "The PT is dead, the PT is finished." Six years have passed, and it was them who ended. I don't even know if the DEM still exists. The PSDB is trying to resurrect the young Fernando Henrique Cardoso because it didn't create leaders, it didn't promote leaders. This must increase the resentment they have towards us – which, incidentally, is not reciprocated.

Don't you feel any anger towards the opposition?

I'm not angry with them and I don't hold grudges. What I do hold is this: they never made as much money in their lives as they did during my administration. Not even the television stations, which were almost all bankrupt; the newspapers, almost all bankrupt when I took office. Companies and banks also never made so much money, but the workers also profited. Now, obviously I understand that workers can only profit if the company does well. I don't know of a time in human history when a company does poorly and workers manage to achieve anything other than unemployment.

(…)

Brazil has changed in these ten years. And you, have you changed too?

One of the good things about old age is that you take advantage of what life teaches you, instead of lamenting that you're old. Life has taught me a lot. Creating a party under the conditions we did was very difficult. Now that the party is big, everything is easy, but I used to travel this country to hold assemblies with three people, four people, five people. I would leave here in São Paulo for Acre to hold meetings with ten people, to convince Chico Mendes to join the PT, to convince João Maia – the one who received money to vote in Fernando Henrique Cardoso's election and was a lawyer for Contag – to join the PT. It was very difficult to organize caravans, travel to the Northeast, take buses, spend a week walking, holding rallies at midday, under a scorching sun, explaining what the PT was so that people would want to join.

Why?

The election is becoming a very complicated thing for Brazil. It's happening all over the world. In Brazil, if the PT doesn't react to this, few parties will be willing to react. So the PT needs to react and try to bring political reform into discussion. When I was president, I tried to talk about an exclusive Constituent Assembly, which is the way forward: electing people who will only carry out political reform, who will go there [to Congress], change the game, and then leave. And then elections for Congress can be called. What can't continue is like this.

Sometimes I get the impression that political parties are a business, when in fact they should be an extremely important asset to society. Society has to believe in the parties, it has to participate in the parties.

Has the PT (Workers' Party) not necessarily changed for the better?

The Workers' Party (PT) changed because it learned the democratic coexistence of diversity; but, at many times, the PT committed the same errors it criticized as completely wrong in other political parties. And that's the electoral game that's at play: if a politician doesn't have money, they can't be a candidate, they can't get elected. If they don't have money to pay for television, they can't run a campaign.

While you're small, nobody questions this. You start being questioned when you become a viable alternative for power. So, the PT (Workers' Party) needs to know this. The stronger the PT becomes, the more serious it needs to be. I don't want to be prejudiced against anyone, but I think the PT needs to go back to believing in the values ​​we once believed in, values ​​that have been trivialized because of electoral competition. It's the kind of legacy we have to leave for our children, our grandchildren. And prove that it's possible to do politics seriously. You can play the political game, you can make political alliances, you can form political coalitions, but you don't need to establish a promiscuous relationship to do politics. The PT urgently needs to return to this as its task and as a practical exercise of democracy. It doesn't have to go back to being sectarian like it was in the beginning.

I remember some of my colleagues lost their jobs at a metal factory, opened a bar, but wanted to join the union and couldn't. "You can't join because you're a boss," they'd say. The poor guy only had a bar! My poor mother-in-law, the mother of Marisa's husband, the mother of Marisa's first husband (I'm the only guy who's had three mothers-in-law in my life, and one who wasn't my mother-in-law; she was my wife's mother-in-law, because of her ex-husband, whom I adopted as my mother-in-law), the poor woman had a 1966 Volkswagen Beetle that she inherited from her husband. And she earned, I think, 600 – back then it was like today's minimum wage – in retirement, but she liked to dress well. She'd arrive at the PT (Workers' Party) meetings and people would say: "Here comes Lula's bourgeois."

There was a candidate for city council who wanted money for his campaign, and I said, "Look, I'm not going to ask for campaign money. If you want, I can introduce you to some people." Then he said, "No, but I don't want to talk to businessmen." I said, "So you want a slum dweller to give you campaign money?" I've campaigned with a piggy bank. I've campaigned in overalls on a platform. In the 1982 campaign, we'd go to the platform, and before I even spoke, we'd advertise the shirts, the buttons, everything we were selling. And we'd sell it right then and there and raise the money to pay for the expenses of that rally.