A - I n f o s

a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **
News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts Our archives of old posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ _The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours | of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013 | of 2014 | of 2015 | of 2016 | of 2017 | of 2018 | of 2019 | of 2020 | of 2021 | of 2022 | of 2023

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups

(en) Brazil, UNIPA: Comunicat n. 79 - Bourgeois elections and class violence: we don't have a democracy to defend, but a tyranny to fight! (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Date Sat, 21 Jan 2023 09:58:54 +0200

Bakuninism interprets bourgeois elections through class war, analyzing the economic and political conjuncture, the interstate system, as well as the structural aspects of bourgeois elections, their role in the reproduction of exploitation and oppression systems and the performance of each of the actors involved (parties , interest groups, class entities and fractions of the bourgeoisie), their programs in appearance and essence. ---- The Bakuninist approach requires: 1) a materialist analysis, that is, understanding the class war by analyzing the concrete actions of political subjects, organizations and class fractions in the processes of capitalist exploitation and oppression; and 2) a dialectical analysis, which we resort to the antinomy authority-freedom , that is, the contradictions between the forces of bourgeois order, or the system of authority , between popular and revolutionary forces, or the system of freedom .

Therefore, we must understand that a) elections are an expression of the game of bourgeois domination, as a reinforcement of statism; b) elections are determined by clientelism, patronage, electoral corrals, violence and vote buying; c) reformist parties can win elections to the extent that they equip classist organizations such as trade unions and movements electorally, and in doing so, weaken the movement; d) the maintenance of these reformist parties in the power bloc depends on their assimilation and collaboration with fractions of the dominant classes.

In our Communiqué No. 61 , of January 1, 2019, we stated:

Every neoliberal agenda is organically linked to the expansion and improvement of repression, therefore, the proto-fascist and ultraliberal program of the Bolsonaro-Mourão government points to a new stage of repression of the people accompanied by surrender policies, that is, subservience to interests of Capital, with advances in privatizations, dismantling of public services and destruction of social and labor rights .

The Bolsonaro-Mourão government confirmed itself as a government of clerical-military-bourgeois reaction. The ruling classes broke the class conciliation pact that sustained the PT governments (2003-2016), propitiating, with the support of the Armed Forces and the Judiciary, the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff and the subsequent rise of Bolsonaro, whose electoral campaign in the barracks began still in 2014. This is yet another counterinsurgency reaction, a reaction to the insurgent popular movement of 2013 and the ascending cycle of strikes and occupations that followed (2013-2017). The advance of proto-fascism strengthened the authority system, militarism, theologism and ultraliberalism in the power structure of the Federal Government.[1]

Thus, between 2016 and 2018, Bolsonaro outlined a political dispute strategy that not only relied on external factors that benefited him (PT crisis, Trump administration, lack of leadership in the traditional right, etc.), but also his own actions that managed to take advantage of of these elements and give a relative unity (albeit very unstable, and against the will of some bourgeois factions) around his candidacy.

In early 2021[2]we stated that the defense of a military coup in Brazil as a strategy of the national and international bourgeoisie was losing strength. Thus, the bourgeois fractions pointed to two more likely trends: 1) the construction of a more pragmatic and neoliberal electoral alternative without Bolsonaro and 2) a new class conciliation pact with the leftist party-union bureaucracies. The trend towards a new pact was being built with Lula's eligibility, the change in the US government and the opening of the CPI on the Pandemic and was consolidated with the transfer of toucan Alckmin to the PSB.

In the field of union, popular and student movements, the policy of degenerate reformism (Frente Brasil Popular e Povo Sem Medo, CUT, UNE, MST, MTST, PT, PCdoB), led by lulopetismo, was to wear down Bolsonaro, mainly through institutional means, such as the CPI and by virtual and symbolic actions, such as impeachment requests, including with former Bolsonarist parliamentarians, such as Joyce Hesselman. That is, he assumed the construction of the electoral pact of collaboration and conciliation with the dominant factions.

In turn, the "renewed" reformism on the rise, recently articulated from the UP/PCR, PCB and PSOL currents, built the "Povo na Rua" front, whose policy was to remove Bolsonaro via impeachment before the 2022 elections. . Street acts in 2021 gained relative strength with the coming together of movements from the peripheries and favelas and revolutionary anarchists and unionists, who had already been combining a policy of mutual aid with direct action in the streets, including clashing with reformist sectors that tried to prevent the advance of the demonstrations. However, the collaborationist policy of lulopetismo managed to prevail,

For its part, the bourgeoisie failed in its attempt to build the so-called "third way", just as it failed in its effort to "tame" the captain. For this reason, it found itself divided between the fractions that bet their chips on Bolsonaro's re-election, as in the case of the São Paulo bank-cracy and Agribusiness, and those that joined the Broad Front brought together by the Lula-Alckmin ticket , in particular the national bourgeoisie. and international level of the so-called "green capitalism".

It is also important to highlight the external factors that benefited the lulopetismo policy: 1) the victory of Joe Biden and the Democrats over the Trumpist extreme right; 2) imperialist financing via "green capitalism" and its geopolitical interests in the Amazon; 3) conflicts between imperialist powers incited by the Ukraine war and 4) the genocidal management of the Pandemic by the Bolsonaro government.

1. The elections and the strengthening of the extreme right in the bourgeois parliament.

The first round of bourgeois elections[3]expressed a breakdown of the neoliberal right organized mainly in the PSDB alliance with the former PFL, whose reference is the two governments of Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Marco Maciel (1994-2002). The PSDB/Cidadania party federation elected 18 federal deputies, that is, they lost eleven seats. União Brasil, the result of the merger of the DEM with the PSL, which was born with the discourse of being the largest party, elected only 59 deputies, an increase of 8 seats. The MDB also had a small growth, rising from 47 to 52 elected representatives. Similar reductions took place on the benches of the Republicans, Solidarity, PP, PSD, PTB.

The benches of the bourgeois fractions suffered reductions in the National Congress[4]: the business bench reduced from 204 deputies and 38 senators to, respectively, 178 and 32; the ruralist group reduced from 80 deputies and 27 senators to 57 and 24, respectively; the evangelical/bible bench reduced from 85 deputies to 73, but in the Senate it increased from 7 to 12 representatives; the security/bullet bench reduced from 61 deputies to 56, but in the Senate it increased from 9 to 10 representatives.

It is important to highlight that these relative reductions in the benches of the bourgeois fractions do not represent losses in their capacities for pressure and influence, in fact, their interests are united in the agendas of the extreme right and Bolsonarism gathered mainly in the parliamentarians elected by the PL, Bolsonaro's current party. which elected 99 federal deputies, coming close to the record of the former PFL, which elected 100 deputies in 1998. With the largest bench, the PL aims to be the center of gravity of the extreme right and Bolsonarism in parliament.

In the field of degenerate reformism, the PT increased the number of seats in the Federal Chamber to 68 deputies, and its party federation with the PCdoB and PV reached 80 elected representatives. The federation of PSOL and Rede have 14 elected representatives. In turn, the union bench practically maintained the previous number. There are 41 congressmen (30 from the PT), 36 deputies and 6 senators. Already Alckmin's PSB reduced its bench from 24 to 14 deputies.

In the second round of elections, degenerate reformism defended the candidacy of the Lula-Alckmin ticket under the argument of fighting Bolsonarism and defending democracy, that is, the bourgeois order under the aegis of the 1988 Constitution. Thus, it managed to attract support from the neoliberal right , both the old leaders of the PSDB and the renewed neoliberals, like the MDBist Simone Tebet.

The renewed reformists also defended the "critical vote" on the Lula-Alckmin ticket, under the justification that the electoral defeat of the Bolsonaro-Braga Neto ticket would be a hard blow to Bolsonarism, since it would remove its control over the State machine, the resources and public policies. This idealist argument abstracts from the growth of the extreme right and its radicalization. It abstracts from the fact that the elected representation of the extreme right in the National Congress is in itself sufficient to approve any measure, including the ultraliberal reforms not completed by Bolsonaro and Guedes, such as the Administrative Reform. Mainly, it abstracts that there is no point in changing the government on duty, as all the structures of domination and exploitation remain intact.

The new composition of the bourgeois parliament and the new rearrangement of the executive power, with an apparent return to the class conciliation pact, are consequences of the polarization between Lulopetismo and Bolsonarism (centralized in the PL, but ideologically pulverized in several parties, Republicans, União Brazil, PP, MDB, PSD, among others). This polarization is an expression of the sharpening of the class war in the countryside and in the city. Preliminary information from the Pastoral Land Commission points out that by August 2022, 25 murders were recorded as a result of conflicts, while in the whole of 2020 there were 20 murders. In the same month of August, pistol shooting was responsible for 40% of deaths in the camp[5]. Across the country, police forces murdered 6,133 people in 2021 and expanded terrorism over favelas and peripheries with the multiplication of massacres. While violence in the countryside is imposed by the agribusiness bourgeoisie to increase the colonization of nature and territories, massacring the native peoples, the genocide of black people in the favelas and outskirts is one of the main weapons for the imposition of increasingly precarious conditions of life and work.

For an effective understanding of the current context of class war, overcoming the idealism of reformism, whether in its degenerate or renewed version, it is necessary to reflect and analyze Brazil in the international context, to understand the political and economic interests and conflicts of the powers imperialists.

2. New Cold War and the location of Brazil in the new International Division of Labor

The Bakuninist interpretation, when characterizing global capitalism in its ultra-monopoly phase, highlights the concentration of capital accumulation from the expansion of forms of super-exploitation of the collective forces of the working class on a world scale. Thus, the interstate system of domination imposes the resurgence of dependence and subordination of peripheral and semi-peripheral nations to empires, it is the expansionist-monopolist of States and the capital responsible for the "new global wave of colonization" with the geopolitical context of "new cold war".[6]

In the ultra-monopoly phase, the "developmentalist" model of the PT governments in the first decades of the 21st century guaranteed and reinforced the subordinate insertion of the Brazilian economy in the regime of concentrated capital accumulation, with the so-called macroeconomic tripod ( floating exchange rate, inflation target and target tax), and the export dependence of agroextractivist activities, thus increasing the power of the bank, rentism and agribusiness itself, while favoring a portion of the CLTtist formal salaried working class, whose official unions were linked to the CUT, and civil servants public. This was the basis of the conciliation of classes in the period 2003-2015.

Dilma Rousseff's impeachment, which unilaterally broke the class conciliation pact, was simultaneously a counterinsurgency movement and an alignment of the Brazilian economy according to imperialist interests. The capitalist powers demanded a surrender government, a role that Michael Temer/MDB (2016-2018) fulfilled without hesitation, applying one in Petrobras' new pricing policy through the PPI (International Price Parity).[7]

The rise of Bolsonarism meant the advancement of surrender policies with the ultraliberal policies of Paulo Guedes. It was Brazil's alignment with the global extreme right, and fundamentally Donald Trump's position in the US. This subordination to imperialism in its version of the international extreme right guaranteed benefits to the bourgeois fractions that supported the rupture of the class conciliation pact, thanks to the maintenance of the macroeconomic tripod, the approval of the public spending ceiling, the privatization of state companies , the labor and social security reforms, environmental deregulation, colonization over territories and the massacre of indigenous peoples, peasants and blacks and peripherals.

Brazilian indigenous peoples in the fight against the construction of the Belo Monte hydroelectric plant in Xingú
This realignment was a requirement of the new wave of colonization of the empires, to guarantee a predatory expansion of the extractive industry and agroindustry and, consequently, provoked the deterritorialization of indigenous peoples, quilombolas and other traditional communities. This economically and politically strengthened the agribusiness bourgeoisie. The PAC of the PT governments served these anti-people interests, strengthening both the rural bourgeoisie and the financial sectors, the bancocracy, since there was no macroeconomic change. But the imperialist crisis required the radicalization of the wave of colonization, above all the subordination of the land, nature and peoples.Only an extreme right-wing government, with a submissive and ultra-liberal policy, would be able to fulfill this task.

In this way, the dependent insertion in the capitalist world economy and in the interstate system was radicalized in the sense of increasing the informal labor market linked to the service sector and subservience to US interests, under the aegis of the Trumpist extreme right. Thus, Brazil remained a major supplier of raw materials and food, while at the same time benefiting the bank and exporting agribusiness with the devaluation of the real.

The environmental deregulation promoted by the Bolsonaro Government deeply affected the already difficult and limited work of IBAMA employees and with that affected Brazilian international relations, which had blocked foreign funds and entered into a collision course with the European Union's foreign policy of environmental protection , the UN and Biden, as soon as he won the elections. In this sense, the Bolsonaro government weakened all multilateral integration policies based on the BRICS and at the same time began to displease the US itself, given the alliance of the Trumpist extreme right with the Bolsonaro family, in particular.

Still on the international stage, we have the appearance of the Covid-19 Pandemic that disorganized the global production chains and the increase in unemployment in China impacted the entire world economy, in addition to the War in Ukraine[8]which increased the price of fuel, increasing the internal price given Petrobras' pricing policy to favor shareholders.

In this way, the Pandemic and the Ukraine War, in addition to Biden's victory in the US, opened space for a possible new class pact in the context of Brazilian dependent capitalism. In this context, on the one hand, the rise of China as a dominant power and the shift from the North Atlantic to Asia as the main center of capitalist accumulation. On the other hand, the decline of the global military power of the USA and its supporters, marking the end of the Eurocentric civilizational hegemony.

Geopolitics determined by ultramonopoly despotic tendencies and the intensification of inter-imperialist disputes, in the form of the "new cold war", dominate the reorganization of the interstate system since the beginning of the 2010s, however, plague and war, that is, the The Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine acted as catalysts for these trends and variations of statist despotism and theologism.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine and NATO's support for Ukraine are part of the US-Russia infra-energy disputes. Oil and Gas will still be the main energy sources in the next 20 years. The European and US sanctions against Moscow favored the strengthening of its political, economic and military relations with Beijing, that is, they produced the opposite effect to that intended by the European Union and the US. So far, the EU has been the most affected, given its dependence on Russian gas and the geopolitical difficulties in having other sources of supply that are closer and cheaper, impacting its energy transition project.

Growing disputes over mineral and infra-energy resources impact on the expropriation of common goods to convert nature into a commodity. Resources such as water and forest maintenance are becoming commodities to be traded, which is one of the main points of global climate conferences. Brazil, Indonesia and the Democratic Republic of Congo are already negotiating a kind of "OPEC of the forests", since they have the largest tropical forests on the planet, with the aim of transforming tropical forests into commodities to be traded in the carbon market.

In this way, we can see that the pandemic situation and condition with genocidal action by the Brazilian government that caused more than 700,000 people to die, the global impact on the acceleration of geostrategic trends in countries, such as reindustrialization projects, in addition to infrastructure disputes and the The rise of the global extreme right, which was electorally defeated in the United States, made it possible for the PT to build a range of alliances whose main point was the defense of the Amazon, which in practice means the development of a green capitalism in Brazil as a major supplier of carbon sequestration. , not eliminating the financialized and dependent character of Brazilian capitalism.

3 - The return of lulopetismo and post-election Bolsonarism

From the point of view of elections, lulopetismo[9]built a Frente Ampla in defense of the liberal bourgeois order inaugurated from the Constitution of 1988. In this sense, the Lula-Alckmin alliance and its victory favored the system of authority, by strengthening and legitimize state powers.

Degenerate reformism, its organizations and its grassroots militancy have been celebrating the electoral victory as if the extreme right and its project had been defeated. However, the Frente Ampla is incapable of defeating the extreme right, nor does it mean a defeat of the racist and patriarchal bourgeoisie. Bakunin clearly perceived the fallacy of alliances with bourgeois parties when he stated that

all the experiences of history show us that an alliance concluded between two different parties always works to the benefit of the most backward party; this alliance necessarily weakens the most advanced party, diminishing, deforming its program, destroying its moral strength, its confidence in itself . (BAKUNIN, 1872[10]).

The reformist degeneration of lulopetismo was materialized in 2002, with the electoral alliance with the PL, however, the alliances of the Frente Ampla of 2022 indicate a moment of no return, whose degeneration advances towards the field of renewed reformism. Passive adherence to the electoral project of lulopetismo reinforced the guardianship and commitment of all leftist electoral parties, including their bureaucracies in the union, student and popular movement, with the bourgeois, racist and patriarchal State.

Degenerate and "renewed" reformism follow predictable political strategies of realignment with the bourgeois order, as Bakunin states:

Between the radical party of republicans and the moderate doctrinaire party of constitutional liberals there is no essential difference. Among them, the principle is the same; only their temperaments differ. Both sides place the State, family law and, deriving from the latter, the right of inheritance and private property at the base of their social organization, that is, the right of the possessing minority to exploit the work of the non-existent majority. owner. (Bakunin, 1870[11]).

This new realignment of the reformist camp seeks to avoid new ruptures in the organization of masses linked to lulopetismo, as occurred with the creation of CONLUTAS and with the foundation of PSOL. In fact, Psolism may crumble with its adherence to the government. Likewise, it must increase control over the combative proletarian youth and alignment trends in local struggles with more autonomous movements or struggles. It is, therefore, the strengthening of the State and the Republic of 1988 through increasing the tutelage and control over popular movements as a way of safeguarding "democracy".Not by chance, Lula has already announced the return of spheres of class conciliation: the so-called national conferences, tripartite forums that bring together the government, businessmen and union, student and popular bureaucracies.

Quite possibly we will have more strengthening of these spheres of class conciliation with the reissue of the strategy to co-opt and weaken popular struggles, replacing them with the know-how developed by the CUT and by the other reformist social movements in previous PT governments: participation in state spheres to discussion and implementation of public policies from the conciliation of classes .

The relative novelty in the strategy of taming the popular masses and their adherence to the bourgeois order is found in ministerial formation, such as the incorporation of the false discourse of "representativeness" and "identitarianism", since political characters such as Sonia Guajajara (PSOL ), Silvio Almeida (non-party), Margareth Menezes (non-party) and Anielle Franco (non-party) become part of the executive branch.

From the point of view of the ruling classes, Bolsonaro's electoral defeat and Lula's return to the presidency of the republic did not represent a threat to their existence and capitalist domination in Brazil. Immediate interests of certain dominant fractions may be affected, but in no way in terms of liquidating their power or investment. On the geopolitical level, the Lula government may find a space for action within the conflict between the US and China, given the relative importance of Bolsonaro's defeat to the US extreme right, which did not achieve a victory by a large margin, as expected, in the elections of midterm in the US, remaining as the least seat in the Senate. It is not by chance that, on the one hand, there is talk of resuming previous partnerships, such as the BRICS, for example, and on the other hand, the financing of the Amazon is being negotiated.

In the internal context, the victory of lulopetismo and its allied forces takes place in a scenario of even greater advance of theologism. The center of the debate in the first days of the second round being Freemasonry and Satanism are strong indications of this hypothesis. The political-economic power of the churches and their insertion in impoverished territories with no prospects, given the characteristics of Brazilian dependent capitalism, was and is a fertile ground for its propagation and junction with militarism, extreme right and neoliberal ideologies.

In Communiqué No. 76 we stated:

Thus, the crisis of organization of the proletariat is directly related to this ideological hegemony of the churches, because instead of the popular masses believing and dedicating themselves to collective struggles and the construction of Socialism and Freedom, today they seek in religion and in churches some meaning for life and, mainly, some material, cultural and spiritual assistance. This has generated, on a local scale, great loyalty to reactionary religious institutions, which weekly mobilize more people than assemblies and union acts, which in turn have acted in the macropolitical sphere against the interests of the people (and their own faithful), like the Bible bench in Congress.This contradiction of latent and potential class interests within religious institutions has already generated some fissures, but it will only be resolved in fact with the ideological and political struggle for the reorganization of the working class. The theological basis is still significant and the most popular of Bolsonarismo, literally treated as "maneuver mass" .

Likewise, the current context is marked by the political protagonism of the Armed Forces, which, even after losing the central government, continue to play the role of an organic party of the extreme right, commanding the civil and military police forces of the State based on the doctrine of maintenance of the bourgeois order with the pursuit and combat of popular forces recognized as class enemies. One cannot rule out the possibility that Lula and the Frente Ampla will not finish their mandate, even if this is the lowest scenario, at least in the next two years. The "Joint Note to Military Commands - To the Brazilian Institutions and People",[12]on Bolsonarist protests against the election results, and the nomination of José Múcio Monteiro, who during the Corporate-Military Dictatorship was affiliated with the support party of military governments - Arena, to the Ministry of Defense confirms the maintenance of power as a politician of the Armed Forces as a party that defends the proto-fascist program.

For its part, Bolsonarist militancy, financed by entrepreneurs from the agribusiness and logistics sector and with the support of the police forces and the Armed Forces Command, began an attempt to lockout with the closure of roads in 17 states of the federation, concentrating their actions in the Center-South, mainly Mato Grosso and Santa Catarina. Subsequently, several Bolsonarist and far-right groups received orders in Whatsapp groups to concentrate in front of the barracks asking for military intervention and closure of the regime.

These mobilizations reinforced the mass character of Bolsonarism and the extreme right in Brazil. With the slogan "God, homeland and family"[13]large public demonstrations were held on November 1st, which mostly brought together salaried sectors of the middle class, petty bourgeoisie and wealthy classes, united by anti-people, misogynistic ideologies , racist, lgbtphobic, militaristic and religious. The immediate aftermath was more political violence, with street clashes and attempted terrorist acts.

The basis of lulopetismo opted for the cowardly policy of the discourse in defense of the "democratic state of law", calling for actions by the forces of repression to legitimize the decisions of the Minister of the Supreme Court, Alexandre de Morais. Faced with this situation, small anti-fascist, anarchist, autonomous groups and revolutionary unionists took to the streets as a counterpoint to the action of the extreme right. PT reformism gave the line: do not mobilize the streets and rely on the institutions of the bourgeois republic to contain the fascist impetus.

4 - Advance in the tasks of reorganizing the working class

Bolsonarism, or rather the Brazilian extreme right, does not die with the victory of the Lula-Alckmin ticket. They managed to elect a strong bench aligned with the extreme right and militarism, just as they won in states like São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. There is a Brazilian proto-fascist that for the time being does not have an official hierarchical structure, a centralized mass movement-party. So far, there are several groups that communicate through socio-technical networks with some chain of command, probably from the Armed Forces, and with great funding from businessmen, mainly from the agribusiness and logistics sector in the center-south of the country.There is an anti-people, extremely racist, misogynistic and lgbtphobic sector of Brazilian society capable of mobilizing resources to gain electoral support.[14].

As revolutionary anarchists we have to speak the truth: only a general strike and a popular uprising, similar to 2013, could nationally stop the current bourgeois offensive and the genocide of the Brazilian people. For this, it is urgently necessary to resume the basic capacity of resistance and popular organization. The exercise of revolutionary gymnastics is essential, resuming each activity of resistance and struggle as training for building a general strike that will encourage the working class. This means that the struggle to improve working conditions, the struggle for land, for territory, against racism, against patriarchy and against lgbtphobia must be carried out in a perspective of universal emancipation. In times of hunger,

In the general plan we have the confrontation between the alliance of classes headed by the PT that will try to move in the bourgeois institutionality to promote some type of social benefit based on green capitalism, perhaps reversing the spent ceiling, but not the entire macroeconomic tripod that comes from the Fernando government Henry Cardoso. In this sense, the biggest conflict will be in what kind of macroeconomic, social and fiscal policy will be adopted by the new government and what is its margin of maneuver for this. Today we have no capabilities to destroy our enemies. The people know this. In this sense, it is necessary to reaffirm that the main destructive/creative objectives are:

1) to resume and strengthen the basic instances of struggle and organization of the working class, such as assemblies, meetings , agitation , propaganda, protests, strikes and solidarity networks with a view to building the FOB and the people's congress;

2) combat proto-fascism in the most diffuse and disorganized sectors of the people and the Lulist ideology in the popular-union movement: such combats must combine struggles for immediate concrete demands and the ideological struggle in defense of class independence, the general strike and the boycott electoral. Lulism and Bolsonarism are two historical forms of denial of the autonomous political capacity of the working class, therefore, the principle of class independence without a clearly defined ideological struggle against these two trends is nothing more than hollow phraseology, and this ideological struggle will produce more effect within real claiming movements;

3) construction and strengthening of new tools of struggle for the proletariat and peoples (under the strategy of revolutionary syndicalism), such as autonomous movements and unions, combative oppositions, mutual support groups, popular assemblies, cooperatives, etc.;

4) the development of a revolutionary mass line that articulates the task of opposition to bureaucracies and autonomous organization of the masses, that is, that has the tactical flexibility to dispute the course of struggles as Opposition and as Independent Movements.

The Bakuninist mass line of construction of revolutionary syndicalism in Brazil proved to be correct. Today, the autonomous proto-unions and militant nuclei develop an important demanding, solidary and agitative action, albeit on a small scale, in a national scenario of total demobilization and paralysis on the part of the official and reformist unionism. This action fulfills the important task of preserving and expanding a small pole of resistance formed in the last period through years of political-ideological struggle, thus avoiding apathy and disintegration, and rehearsing methods and organizational forms to build true mass organizations when this is possible.

In this situation of formation of a conciliation government, the trend of systemic integration increases. We have a scenario of the strengthening of reformism and the disintegration of combative or revolutionary sectors with difficulty in acting in a less explosive and revolutionary conjuncture, such as 2013, and it is essential today that we have patience, discipline, cohesion and fraternity among our people for the construction and massification of trade unions, popular rural and city organizations and students and thus serve as an effective possibility of emancipation of all people.

Anarchist and self-employed workers will, in any scenario, be under the pressure of two forces, bourgeois reaction and Lulopetismo. You have to prepare for that. If large-scale events do not occur that modify the ebb situation, the scenarios will be increasingly difficult for combative alternatives in the very short term. That is why it will be necessary to fight from inch to inch, house to house, street to street, fighting on two fronts: the clerical-military-bourgeois reaction, this proto-fascism, and lulopetismo in its versions of degenerate and "renewed" reformism. .

It is necessary to create the objective and subjective conditions for the outbreak, in the long term, of a revolutionary situation in Brazil. For this, we need to advance in the massification of revolutionary unionism in the countryside and in the slums and peripheries, having the exact notion that we do not have a democracy to defend, but a tyranny to fight, either with a red stick, or with a green and yellow stick.






[1]On the rise of Bolsonarism and the impeachment of Dilma Rousseff, see the UNIPA communiqués: "Lulismo and the Crisis of Brazilian Capitalism: Only Direct Action Can Defeat the Reactionary Offensive and the Illusions of Reformism", issue 59, March 2018, and The Poverty of Social Democracy and the Rise of Fascism in Brazil, number 61, January 2019.

[2]Communiqué nº 76 of the Popular Anarchist Union - UNIPA, April 29, 2021.

[3]Data available at: https://www.camara.leg.br/noticias/911504-pl-desponta-como-maior-bancada-da-camara-seguido-pela-federacao-liderada-pelo-pt/

[4]DIAP, Informal Benches in Congress. Available at https://www.diap.org.br/images/stories/bancadas_informais_congresso_2023_2027.pdf

[5]See "We live on the edge of the bullet", Agência Pública, available at https://apublica.org/2022/08/vivemos-na-ponta-da-bala-2022-ja-superou-as-mortes-no -field-in-comparison-to-2020/

[6]VII CONUNIPA: "The new wave of colonization develops in Brazil from the 21st century through the structures of dependent capitalist development and a structure of internal colonialism" (UNIPA, 2019), available at https://uniaoanarquista .wordpress.com/congressos/vii-conunipa-2019/

[7]The dollarization of Brazilian fuel that is within the scope of the location of Brazil in the International Division of Labor as we have pointed out in analyzes since 2011. See OPAR and UNIPA. International Platform of Revolutionary Anarchism, 2011. Available at https://uniaoanarquista.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/par-ptbr-1c2aaerrata.pdf

[8]On the war in Ukraine, see Communiqué n° 77 of the Popular Anarchist Union - UNIPA, 01/03/2022.

[9]We understand lulopetismo is the ideology of Brazilian social democratic reformism in its most advanced state of political degeneration. It is based on the reconciliation of classes based on the figure of Lula, built on the basis of party, union and social movement organizations (especially CUT, CTB, UNE and MST) which economically benefited the working aristocracy, a portion of technocracy and a petty bourgeoisie dependent on the state. Expression of the social-democratic policy directed by the CUT-PT, mainly from the ABC Paulista Metallurgical Union. The very constitution of the PT governments (2003-2016) was a macroeconomic continuation of previous neoliberal governments and their police state was an evolution of the negotiated transaction between "dictatorship and democracy".

[10]Bakunin, Letter to the newspaper La Liberte , from Brussels, Zurich, October 5, 1872.

[11]Bakunin, Universal Alliance of Social Democracy, Russian Section. To Russian Youth, March 1870. Banunin Vive Magazine, Bakunin Archive, n. 1, September, 2021.

[12]"Joint Note to the Military Commands - To the Brazilian Institutions and People", November 11, 2022, available at https://www.acidadeon.com/saocarlos/politica/Em-nota-conjunta-Forcas-Armadas- criticize -excesses-in-manifestations-20221111-0004.html .

[13]The watchword of the extreme right-wing Catholic movement Tradition, Family and Property, which was one of the main social foundations of the 1964 coup.

[14]In our communiqués numbers 69 and 76 we present the difficulties of the extreme right in constituting a centralized party-movement, considering the ethnic-national and class reality of a peripheral country like Brazil.

Sponsored Content

A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en
A-Infos Information Center