If you are in your sixties
like me, and particularly if you were born in France, you remember 1968.
How did it start? Sociologists and politologists have come up
with involved theories to explain the so-called “Events of May ‘68”. Call me a skeptic. Yes, there had been months of student
protests in Nanterre, then the most politically “progressive” campus in Paris,
but frankly, that was no news. The
temperature rose when the authorities decided to put an end to the disorders,
and student unions called for demonstrations on other campuses and in lyçées (high schools). But that was hardly earth shattering or
critical for what turned out to be the most impactful event in France’s last
half century.
From my own perspective, a
key factor was that May was the month that preceded life-defining tests for
millions of French youths: the dreaded baccalaureat
which is the necessary key to enter university, the concours (competitive exams) to enter the top universities (so
called grandes écoles), and the
year-end university exams. We were all
stressed and apprehensive, and for many, the possibility of postponing these
scary trials, even temporarily, AND having fun in doing so, was appealing.
Sure, student protest had
gained international visibility, mostly in the US against the Vietnam War, but
many American trends and influences came to France without threatening the
stability of the country.
It is also true that the
French may have been tired of the quasi-regal leadership of President de Gaulle
and at first may not have minded students poking him in the eye so to speak. The initial government reaction lacked coordination,
and the authorities quickly second-guessed themselves, thus increasing
confusion. None of that is very unusual
or likely to trigger what turned out to be a quasi coup.
But when the French government
started to look and act weak and disheartened, and its leader failed to appear
(he even disappeared for a while), then several dissatisfied groups and
political opportunists felt emboldened to act: unions called for national
strikes and some of them for industrial sabotage,
opposition parties called for large demonstrations and even tried to force a
change in government at the famous Charlety
mass meeting.
As we know, all the disorder
came to an abrupt end when President de Gaulle reappeared and forcefully
declared on TV that he wouldn’t leave power.
Overnight, political and social calm were restored. But as we also know, de Gaulle resigned the
following year and the fallouts of May 68
endure to this day.
In retrospect, I still
believe that the huge upheaval of May 1968 didn’t have to happen. It all started with students defying
authority and trying to postpone dreaded exams, and enjoying what at first was
frat house partying and horseplay.
History doesn’t always unfold
according to vast socio-economic Marxist trends. More often than not, it does, but now and
then major tremors and changes can be traced to the acts of an individual or to
an improbable chain reaction.
Which brings us to Brazil. What is happening in Brazil today is not a
repetition of May 68, but as Mark Twain once said, history rhymes.
The unexpected uncovering of
the so-called Lava Jato corruption
scandal and its consequences have dealt very severe body blows to Brazilian democracy
and I would say it is weaker than it has ever been in the last half-century. To wit:
-
One president was
impeached and forced to resign,
her successor is currently in jail and the current president is under a
corruption cloud and commands a record low 6% approval score;
-
Dozens of
congressmen have been indicted and jailed, including both leaders and rank and
file, governing coalition and opposition members;
-
While the judiciary
branch, in the end, did allow justice to be done, the heavy lifting
(investigative work and sentencing) was carried out by the Federal Police and
state-level judges, and the highest federal judicial instances vacillated more
than once.
The public is rejecting main
stream political parties and their leaders, it rejects the president, it is
divided about the judiciary system as many either distrust it or positively reject
its condemnation of ex-president Lula.
In the middle of this rising
chaos and polarization, some actors are starting to test the system.
One is the PT, the party of ex-President
Lula. It is interesting to remember that
Lula has often believed that a chaotic situation would help the PT take power. As Lula still leads all opinion polls by a
wide margin, Gleisi Hoffmann, the president of the PT, this week warned that
keeping Lula in jail would lead Brazil to chaos. The PT is also launching a Lula presidential
campaign despite him being ineligible.
In doing so, she sets on a direct
collision course with General Villas Boas, the Chief-of-Staff of the Brazilian
Armed Forces, who twice publicly warned
the Supreme Court that the law must be respected and nobody is above the law. The general’s Twit received the support of
several high ranking generals, some in active duty others retired.
Truck drivers have been the
second, unexpected, and much more immediately damaging force. As Petrobras had won the right to set prices daily
in accordance with world markets, truck driver unions organized massive road blockages
last May to protest diesel price hikes. The government quickly capitulated, forcing a
price freeze by Petrobras, then offering gas price cuts to be financed by the
government, then backtracked again, then offering truck drivers a pricing table
for the freight that they carry.
In the span of a few weeks,
the PT and the truck drivers have exposed the extreme weakness of the government,
the former by brazenly demanding immunity for its leader, the latter by strong-arming
it and hurting the economy. In the
meantime, criminality has surged in Rio de Janeiro and elsewhere, and no high
caliber presidential candidate has risen from the field to offer people hope
that the turmoil will soon be over.
There might be a respite in
the above struggles, but I doubt they will end well. The pricing table proposed by the government
to the truck drivers and the compensation offered to Petrobras (but not to
other fuel importers) have little chance to work in a country as vast and an
economy as segmented as Brazil. To make
things worse, the drivers threw the first punches and clearly hit their mark.
As to the PT, it has the most
popular leader (Lula) and the most effective organization of any Brazilian
party. As I wrote above, I think it is
convinced that it will fare better than anyone else should chaos develop; it
also sees that the current government can be pushed around with impunity.
Brazilians have a culture of
moderation, but events can unwind faster than expected, or take an unexpected
direction. In the current climate, the
system offers little in terms of guardrails, so that an unlikely possibility can
quickly become reality, a moderate skid can develop into an uncontrollable
crash.
History doesn’t repeat
itself, but it does rhyme.
