The hypocrisy of petty politics
Several candidates vied for the PP's support. No criticism was made. But when the PT manages to expand its alliance, all the rigor of consistency is pulled out of drawers and closets.
From the earliest stages of state development, politics has been seen as the instrument for the advancement of society. Much human blood has been shed so that political action could replace the force of the state (primitive or modern) with the formation of social consensus.
The ability of politics to unite is therefore the great instrument for building a democratic society in its broadest sense, including the economic one.
Another point to consider: all the great theorists who have thought about political parties may differ in their ideological conceptions and theoretical premises, but they all converge on one concept: the party is not an end in itself, it is an instrument of social action.
I could also revisit Gramsci's concept of hegemony here. However, I think it's worth noting, but rather unnecessary. In short: the part does not hegemonize the whole, but rather the strength of consensus determines the scope of action.
This brief overview serves to support the following statement: how much hypocrisy there is in the reflections on the PT's alliance with the PP in the capital of São Paulo.
I respect the personal decision (based on a political analysis, but expressing her personal view of the current situation and the balance of power in building a project for the city, state, and country) of Representative Luiza Erundina. However, I cannot remain silent in the face of the opinions arising from this fact.
Several candidates vied for the PP's support. No historical or moral criticism was made. But when the PT manages to expand its alliance, increasing its capacity for dialogue with the electorate, all the rigor of coherence is pulled out of drawers and closets.
Why wasn't this same criticism made before? The PT isn't the only party with leaders who fought for the democratization of Brazil. It's worth remembering that when the PSD approached Haddad's pre-candidacy, we witnessed the same phenomenon. Who benefits from the political limitations of the PT?
No one in the press has seen the Workers' Party "giving up" its programmatic concepts in order to broaden its alliance policy. We are, in fact, seeking to build a party coalition.
We want to present the complex electorate of São Paulo with concrete proposals to make São Paulo not only a rich city, but also a socially just and sustainable one. The same coalition that supported Lula's government and supports Dilma's government, which created the political conditions for the greatest economic and social transformation in our history, must be pursued in the city of São Paulo.
The PT is a party that has matured and understands its historical role and responsibilities. We want to be the party in São Paulo that has the capacity to help form coalitions, build consensus, and transform the feelings and desires of society into hegemonic ideas.
We are aware of the complexity of São Paulo society, but we also know that it is possible to offer the population of São Paulo, now in 2012, the same project that is transforming Brazil.
In due time and without hypocrisy, let's also debate the immorality of the floods that humiliate São Paulo families, the unacceptable traffic and public transportation, the chaotic health system, the disorganized education system, and the conservative public security policy. Let's debate what motivates Haddad's candidacy and the necessary political coalition.
Rescuing Paulo Freire's pedagogical concept regarding dialogue and conflict, in a phrase often used by President Lula: "Let's bring together the different to overcome the antagonistic."
EDINHO SILVA, 47, sociologist, is president of the PT (Workers' Party) in the state of São Paulo and a state representative.