"We need to create a political front to think ahead and have an alternative project to the bourgeoisie," says Stedile
In an interview with Brazil de Fato, João Pedro Stedile, national MST leader, analyzes the moment experienced by the Brazilian society and points out the challenges that the progressive sectors must face: "Do not move yet to build an alternative program."
A leader of the MST, the major people’s movement in the countryside in Brazil, João Pedro Stedile sees a difficult and complex setting for the working class, "a period of confusion that will not be resolved in the short term."
For him, the difficulties of this situation mean that, "on the one hand, people see every day the bourgeoisie taking initiatives against them, and an inert and incapable government. And on our part, we could not get to the "the masses" with our proposals, because the media is controlled by the bourgeoisie. "
In an interview with Brazil de Fato, Stedile points out how he sees movements of the government, the elites and popular sectors. He criticized the fiscal adjustment that Dilma’s second term has implemented and recognized the need and challenges to develop a unified political alternative proposal to what is provided, "If the government does not change course, it will continue to further sink in unpopularity and the inability to exit the crisis."
Check out the interview below:
Brazil de Fato - How do you see the Brazilian political scene?
João Pedro Stedile - Brazil is going through a very difficult and complex historical period. What we have discussed in the plenaries of the popular movements is that we are passing through three major crises.
One is the economic crisis, with a paralyzed economy, lack of industrial growth and signs of unemployment and falling incomes of the working class.
Another is the social crisis, the problems, especially in large cities, such as homelessness, public transport, increasing violence against youth in the suburbs and millions of young people who are unable to enter university only increase. The 8 million young people who enrolled in ENEM [National High School Exam – used to test for university enrollment], for example, competed for 1.6 million openings. And those who did not get accepted, where do they go?
The latter is a serious political and institutional crisis, where the population does not recognize the legitimacy and leadership in elected officials. This is due to the electoral system, which allows companies to fund their candidates. To get an idea, just the ten largest companies elected 70% of parliament. That is, representative democracy has been kidnapped by capital, and this generated an election hypocrisy and unsurpassed political distortion.
This is reflected in the agendas that parliament adopts and ideas they defend, that has nothing to do with their constituents. Just look at one case: in Brazilian society we have 51% women. A project to ensure 30% female representation was presented, but they blocked it. And with that, let's just keep the current 9%!
How do you evaluate the proposals that dominate the public debate to overcome this scenario?
The ruling classes, those who hold economic power in our society are very smart. No wonder they have ruled for 500 years. They realized the severity of the crisis, and so abandoned the covenant of class alliances with workers, represented by the election of Lula and Dilma, which resulted in neo-developmentalist program [the implementation of redistributive measures aimed at social inclusion through mass consumption].
The neo-developmentism, while a government program, has run its course. The sectors of the bourgeoisie who were part of and benefited from this program have dropped out, and now are betting on another program.
The new program of this sector out of the crisis is basically the defense of the minimal state, using masks as the reduction of ministries, less interference of the state in the economy, the removal of labor rights - in order to decrease the cost of labor and resume high rates of profit and to be able to compete better in the global market with their competitors.
The third element is the realignment of the economy and foreign policy to the United States. For this, they criticize the policies of the BRICs [Brazil. Russia, India, China], Unasul [Union of South American Nations], Mercosur [Common Market of the South] and openly advocate the return of the FTAA [Free Trade Agreement of the Americas].
This is the program of the ruling class to exit the crisis. There is another thing which is the return of neoliberalism. And to achieve these goals they set in motion their political operators in the spaces in where they have complete hegemony, such as the National Congress, the judiciary and the bourgeois media.
These three powers are working permanently and in coordination with each other so that this program is implemented. And the ideological party that is tailoring this unity between the three spaces is the Rede Globo [largest TV network in Brazil, second largest in the world].
The government has taken several initiatives of economic policy, provisional measures and fiscal adjustments. How do the movements see these initiatives?
For us, the Dilma government did not understand the nature of the established crisis, or what's going on in Brazilian society. Nor did they understand ideological struggle that was fought in the second round of elections, a tremendous class struggle.
The government was wrong to put together a ministry which is very dependent on the conservative parties, who also voted against the government in parliament. It is rather schizophrenic. Perhaps the worst ministry since the new republic and it is summarizing the crisis as a deficit problem in the budget.
But the budget deficit is only consequence of the crisis, and there is no use in taking palliative measures. As well explained Professor Belluzzo, "the engine of the economy crashed, and the government is worried about the bodywork of the car."
Amazingly, all MPs and the initiatives of the government have not only failed to solve the aforementioned crises, as they tend to make them worse, because they are in the appearance of problems and do not go to the causes.
Worse, many of the measures, especially the economy, are going toward the bourgeois program, i.e., removing workers' rights. Increasing the interest rate is all the hegemonic sector of the capitalists wants: make money from rent-seeking and speculation.
If the government does not change course, does not change its economic policy and not take initiatives that put the debate in society - the need for a profound political reform - it will continue sinking further into unpopularity and inability to end the crisis.
In this complex environment, is coup possible?
The ruling classes, capitalists, entrepreneurs and the right, as an ideological field, are very diverse in such a complex society like ours. As much as the Rede Globo strives to give unity to them, they cannot have consensus on the way to see the problems and proposals for ending the crisis.
Admittedly it has more radical sectors of the right who want the coup, impeachment, even by parliament. But I believe that an institutional confusion does not matter to business sectors.
What they want is for the government to assume their program. Only that. On the other hand, the same reasons to have impeachment procedures for Dilma could be applied to the governors Geraldo Alckmin (PSDB) [governor of São Paulo state], Beto Richa [governor of the state of Paraná] (PSBD [Brazilian Social Democratic Party – center, right]), etc., which would create widespread confusion.
Unfortunately I think the government fell into this trap. And even assuming the program of the ruling class, the three crises are not solved. So we are in a period of confusion that will not be resolved in the short term.
And what is the proposal of popular movements in this situation?
For the popular movements, the situation is also complex. The movements and popular forces, which include all the organizational forms, such as parties, trade unions, social movements, pastoral, etc., have not been able to organize a common platform, an output unit program of the crisis.
We have general ideas, in theory, for example, the understanding that the economic crisis will abate only if the government abandoned the primary surplus and, rather than pay $ 280 billion in interest per year, invest public resources in industry to generate employment, public works transportation, housing and education.
In the political crisis, we will only overcome it if we have a deep political reform. There are general ideas, about the necessary structural reforms. However, it is necessary to build a program that unifies all social sectors and give unity to the mass mobilization actions.
For now, only the organized sectors of the working class are mobilizing. The "mass" of the people are quiet, nervously watching television news of the crisis and the lack of alternatives.
On the one hand, people see every day the bourgeoisie taking initiatives against it, and an inert and incapable government. And on our part, we could not get to the "masses" with our proposals, because the media is controlled by the bourgeoisie.
How do you see the process of the “operação Lava-Jato” [money laundering investigation] and allegations of corruption involving companies and Petrobras?
There are many aspects involved in this issue. Of course there are people and entrepreneurs who appropriated those resources personally and even sent funds abroad, and therefore are corrupt.
But corruption in Brazilian society is much broader. It is present in the management of public resources, involving politicians of all parties and other social sectors.
When a professor at USP [University of São Paulo],who is dedicated exclusively to his profession, opens a consulting office, or a second job, he is also being corrupt. But all this only be solved with citizen participation processes in the management of public resources and permanent methods of supervision by society.
But the most pathetic case of money laundering and corruption is to blame this or that. The basic problem is the method the elections. While there is business financing election campaigns will be corruption.
The real solution is not only to want to hold so-and-so responsible, it is to change the system. We need a profound political reform. Congress has already had several tests, including in recent weeks, but has not changed anything. The only way out would be to convene an exclusive constituent assembly, which makes the reform of the Brazilian political system.
Of course the realization of a popular referendum, which legalizes the convocation of the assembly, will only come if the masses are in the streets and fighting for the constituent assembly. That will depend on a new correlation of forces. But this is the only political solution to fight corruption.
It is also important to note that all mechanisms of law, judges and lawyers have denounced the abuses of power of Judge Sergio Moro [judge overseeing the Petrobras corruption trial], extrapolating his functions and using, in collusion with the media, the information leakage, the winning denunciations and arrests with clear partisan bias.
You do not see the same disclosure, commitment and no arrests in similar cases of corruption of the trains of São Paulo, for example, or in the case of so-called mining mensalação [monthly payments made to politicians], or even the frauds committed by the government of Aécio/Anastasia [Aécio Nieves, former governor of Minas Gerais who resigned to run for the Senate and Antonio Anastasia, former vice-governor who became governor when Nieves resigned] in state companies Furnas and Cemig [companies accused of political corruption], in Minas Gerais.
Judge Moro has been paid to feed a middle class hatred against the PT [Workers Party], as if everyone was involved in corruption, all were guilty, when the real culprit is the electoral system, which they do not want change.
And how do you assess the project of Senator Serra (PSDB), which removes from Petrobras the off-shore drilling project?
The Serra Project, discussed in the Senate, is the most striking proof of how the right in parliamentary apply the bourgeoisie's program in Congress out of the crisis.
The project removes the priority of Petrobras off-shore exploration. That's all transnational companies need, as it will be no longer necessary to spend on research, as it is known where the oil is. There is no risk, just go there and get it.
In a continental country like ours, the Brazilian state has no capacity to monitor what these companies would do offshore, or where and how much oil would be taken.
If Petrobras is going through financial difficulties and cannot operate all the wells it is preferable to slow down the exploitation of reserves, ensuring that the Brazilian people have control over them.
Of course, we need Petrobras workers to have greater participation in company management, but what happened in iron ore industry when Fernando Henrique Cardoso privatized Vale do Rio Doce and delivered it for free to US capitalists.
Today, they are exporting billion tons of iron per year, and the Brazilian people has no benefit to this natural wealth, although under the constitution it should be used to benefit the welfare of all people.
I hope that the Senate has the judgment to stop this project, or even if the president vetoes r, and that oil will remain the mobilization and the struggle in defense of Petrobras.
What are the initiatives that the popular movements are taking to position themselves at this juncture?
We are making every effort to build united plenaries of all mass fronts, especially in the states, and encourage organized sectors to fight. In some states this unity is more evident, as was the struggle of teachers in Paraná and Minas Gerais.
At the national level, the unions, especially the CUT (Central Unica dos Trabalhadores), has made an effort to coordinate the mobilization initiatives of the working class in defense of their rights.
And there is a provision, if the outsourcing project advances, to conduct a general strike in all sectors of the economy, to halt this as part of the bourgeois project.
I think there is already a very large drive and willingness to struggle in defense of workers' rights, but not advanced yet to build an alternative program to the class.
We are also proposing a political front, being called Group Brazil. The theme of broad fronts or front of the left has appeared. How does the MST see these proposals?
We are seeing the need to build two complementary areas of fronts, of unity. A front of mass struggles that CUT and the popular movements are starting.
But this is not enough. Another political front is needed, which can unite the popular movements, parties, organizations, pastoral sector and intellectuals to discuss a project for Brazil. That is, a front that is not partisan or electoral. It is a political front to think about the future and have an alternative project to the bourgeoisie.
Of course in building this front there are also different opinions and initiatives. We probably have up to several political fronts. It may not be possible to have unity in this field, since ideologies, parties of personal interests and vanities sometimes overlap the need for unity. And part of the class struggle that diversity.
As for the MST, we are counting on a political, popular and national front that pulls together all the forces who voted for Dilma in the second round. This is an ideological reference. Probably sectors , more to right or more to the left will be unwilling to participate. Not because we don’t want them to, but because they have a different project.
There is a proposal to hold, in September or around semana da pátria [the week around September 7, Brazilian Independence day], a major national plenary in Minas Gerais, bringing together representatives, activists of all popular forces (parties, unions, social movements, pastoral and intellectual) to discuss a popular program to face the right and the crisis.
And in agrarian reform, what is the analysis of the movement of the Dilma government's measures?
Agrarian Reform is also paralyzed, as part of this crisis, the lack of a national project. Fortunately there have been changes in the Ministry of Agrarian Development and the INCRA [National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform], and we have serious and committed comrades for agrarian reform, which helps us a lot to resolve outstanding issues, the passivity of these last ten years.
We have 120,000 families in encampments the government needs to settle. We have a deficit of more than 100,000 houses in the settlements, lack of technical assistance, and agribusiness projects are stopped. If Mr. Levy [Finance Minister] does not hinder, I think these emergency problems will be solved by the new team.
But what is clear is the need for a new agrarian reform project, what we call People's Agrarian Reform, which is based on new paradigms that go beyond the necessary democratization of land ownership.
Beyond it, we need to organize a production that prioritizes the cultivation of healthy food to the entire population. The technological matrix must turn to agro-ecology, install agro-industries and cooperatives in all the settlements in order to increase employment and income to the settlers.
We need to democratize education and expand access to education at all levels. And so this new agrarian reform project takes place will depend on the program and the mobilization of the entire working class. The MST and the landless alone can no longer advance.
Hence our effort to engage with other political and popular joints, for the advancement of People’s Agrarian Reform depends on the general changes, structural reforms of Brazilian society.
Are you going to the meeting of popular movements in Latin America with the Pope Francisco, in Bolivia? What will be the focus of this new meeting?
Since the election of Pope Francis, because of him, we have built channels and dialogue bridges. We did workshops at the Vatican to discuss issues of inequality. We produced a document on the danger of GMOs and pesticides.
We were very happy with the new encyclical of Pope, on ecology, he incorporates many debates that have taken place in peasant movements and among scientists committed to the truth. In October 2014 we had a meeting in the Vatican between the Pope and 180 community leaders from around the world.
We are now following up this dialogue, and we will bring together 1,500 leaders from throughout Latin America to debate with him in Santa Cruz de La Sierra, Bolivia.
Here in Brazil we are going with 250 delegates. Every meeting and our delegation is always divided between three sectors of the popular movements: land (farmers), homeless (the struggle for housing) and labor (union and popular sectors that are organized around work).
I'm sure the meeting will be very fruitful, and we intend to take a common letter of intent between the popular movements and Pope Francis, as the highest representative of the community of thousands of Catholics from around the world.
The Pope's positions in the various areas in which he has positioned itself has been a pleasant surprise to everyone, not only for the popular movements but to society in general.
In Rome he saved three fundamental principles, as a minimum program to save humanity. "No more landless peasants. No family without a decent home, and no worker without work and without rights." I believe now we move on to new topics.
Brasil de Fato
July 6, 2015