Brazilian Protest: It's Not Just About Bus Fares

Source: O Globo

For the past week, protests have been taking place in Brazil, largely unreported, or under-reported, by the US media. During that same time, there has been fairly detailed coverage of protests in Turkey, but not much at all about those in Brazil. Even Brazilian papers provided minimal coverage during the first days of the protests.

The protests began over a rate hike in public transit fares. The hike of 20 centavos amounts to about 10 cents in US currency. That may not seem like much, but for someone making minimum wage, who needs to make multiple bus trips every day to get to and from work, it's a cost that can mount up quickly.

More than that, these protests have provided a focal point around which people can express frustration over even larger issues confronting Brazil. Protesters have cited concerns about political corruption, the wide income gap between the affluent and the poor, the inferior quality of public education, health care, and hospitals, and the huge amounts of public money being spent on soccer stadiums and other facilities in preparation for the World Cup.

Police over-reacted during some of the protests, using tear gas and rubber bullets, and injuring news reporters and other innocent bystanders. This has only intensified the outrage of the people, and yesterday, protests took place in at least 11 major cities across Brazil. Estimates of the total number of protesters in the streets ranged from 250,000 to as many as a million. 

Reports are that these are the biggest protests in Brazil in 20 years.

And the story is finally getting serious coverage. Today's issue of Globo has a large headline "O Brasil Nas Ruas" (Brazil in the Streets) along with two big photos. 

There's an item in BBC News, including a brief analysis, and bloggers are writing about the protests as well: Adam at "Eyes on Brazil" has written several detailed posts, including links to videos, and you can also read what Tom of eatrio.net and Alex of BossaBreezes have to say about the protests. 

More reports are available from the Guardian, USAToday, Reuters, and even the NYTimes is finally giving the story the attention that it deserves. (Update: More coverage by the NYTimes here). 

Dilma, who was imprisoned as a member of a movement that fought against the military dictatorship, issued a statement that said, "Peaceful demonstrations are legitimate. It is natural for the young to demonstrate." 

Politically, the timing of these protests causes a real challenge for Dilma. She's already receiving a lot of criticism for her handling of the economy and for Brazil's sluggish economic growth. While her approval ratings have remained very high in spite of the sluggish economy, public opinion about the protests is bound to have an effect on that. 

It's almost a no-win situation for her: if people support the protests, they are likely to feel that Dilma's government has not done enough to address the issues behind the protests. If they oppose the protests, they may feel that Dilma's government should be cracking down harder on the protesters. 

In his post about the protests, Tom of eatrio.net wrote the following: "Where the Occupy Wall St movement was commonly accused of not having a clear demand, I think the protesters have made a smart decision in choosing a concrete issue to start off with." I think he's made a very important point here. It's much more difficult to mobilize people for a prolonged period of time when there's not a tangible goal involved. 

It will be interesting to see how the local, state, and federal government respond to these protests that appear to be gaining strength. 

Meanwhile, those of us who live in the US might want to ask ourselves, "Why did the protests in Turkey appear to receive more immediate and more thorough US news coverage than those in Brazil?" Another question I have is this: "What would the US news coverage be if large anti-government protests took place in a country like Cuba?" 

Just something to think about.

Update: Articles in Estadão report that bus rates have been reduced in Porto Alegre and Recife. (Of course I can't read more than the headlines, because Estadão now limits access to 5 articles a month. And Folha has just started limiting access to no more than 10 articles a month. In both cases, they require not only an email address, but a CPF in order to register. Very annoying for those of us who live outside of Brazil, or for whatever other reason do not have a CPF).

Dilma Strikes Back

"I will not accept terrorism, even from economists!"

Reuters reports that in a speech on Friday, June 14, Dilma struck back at the growing number of commentators who have been highly critical of her economic policies. During the speech, which Reuters says took place in "a sprawling shantytown in Rio de Janeiro," Dilma seemed to equate her critics with terrorists. 

Specifically, she said:

"They say that Brazil is a country in trouble.... Not only is Brazil not going through a rough patch, we are extremely solid. Everybody has to be humble and accept criticism, but not terrorism."

There is one article about her speech in Estadão, and another one here. 

But I discovered that Estadão now limits you to reading 5 articles a month, unless you're a subscriber or are willing to register. That's a very small number for one month. Even the NYTimes lets you read 20 articles a month before you have to subscribe. I'd be happy to register with Estadão, but they require a valid CPF, which of course I do not have, so I'm out of luck. You can't even email them without a CPF or CNPJ, which I also don't have. I'm sort of surprised that they don't make any allowances for foreign readers to access their site, but I'll grumble about that some other time.

Globo has an article with longer excerpts from the speech. And so far, no limits on the number of articles viewed per month (so there, Estadão). Here's the part where she talks about "terrorism":


"Quero dizer que a inflação jamais vai voltar e está sob controle. Por isso, peço a vocês que não deem ouvidos a esses que jogam sempre no quanto pior melhor. Todo mundo tem que ter a humildade de aguentar as críticas, mas terrorismo, não."


Update: Here's a video clip showing the part of Dilma's speech in which she uses the word "terrorism" to describe the critics of her government's economic policies. I was able to find it using YouTube's search, but unable to find it through Blogger, so you'll have to click on the link instead of seeing the video embedded. (More grumbling).

Dilma's Approval Drops 8 Points….Sort Of

Folha has just published a poll with new data on public opinion of Dilma's government, as well as the state of the Brazilian economy. Compared to a survey done in March, there has been an 8 point decline (from 65% to 57%) in those who rank Dilma's government as "good (bom)" or "excellent (ótimo)." However, the number who assign her a ranking of "OK" (my translation for "regular") rose 6 points, from 27% to 33%. 

Meanwhile, those ranking her as "bad/worst (ruim/péssimo)" rose only 2 points, from 7% to 9%. So the total percentage of those who approve of Dilma's government remains quite high, at 90% (1% have no opinion). The real change is in the level of enthusiasm for her government. 

Of greater to concern to Dilma are the poll results dealing with the economy. 

In March, 51% believed that the economy would improve, but that number has dropped to 39%. There has been an 8 point increase in the percentage who believe the economy will get worse, from 11% to 19%. The number who think it will remain the same is fairly stable, rising from 34% in March to 38% in the latest survey.

Primary causes for economic concern are inflation and unemployment, with rising numbers expressing concerns about both of these problems. Attitudes about unemployment are even more pessimistic than those about inflation, with only 27% believing that unemployment will drop, compared to 41% who believed it would decline in March.

These results come on the heels of a series of negative reports and analyses about Brazil's economy, and specifically, the role that Dilma's government has taken in handling the economy. 

During the past several weeks, Dilma has made some shifts in her economic policies, in the hope that they can reverse some of the negative trends. Even her critics acknowledge that she is more of a pragmatist than an ideologue, and it will be interesting to see if the recent changes bring about positive results.

What does all of this mean as far as the 2014 Presidential election? So far, in spite of the shift in the approval ratings, not much. According to another item in Folha, Dilma continues to be the favorite, with 51% of likely voters expressing support for her. 

"The Economist" Offers Negative Analyses of Brazil's Economy

Source: "The Economist," June 8, 2013

Items in Folha and Estadão provide coverage of several articles in the British magazine The Economist, which are critical of the way that Dilma's administration is handling (or mishandling) Brazil's economy.

One of the articles in The Economist is entitled "Brazil’s disappointing economy: Stuck in the mud," and the other is called "Brazil’s mediocre economy: A fall from grace."

There's also an audio interview with an Economist correspondent stationed in São Paulo, which elaborates on themes developed in the articles.

The first article cites sluggish economic growth, rising inflation, inadequate investment, and a decline in consumer and investor confidence as key problems. It lays most of the blame for these problems on the current administration, whose policies, it claims, have only exacerbated the problems.

The second article goes even further, accusing Dilma of abandoning policies that were initiated when Fernando Henrique Cardoso was Finance Minister. These policies were effective in finally bringing an end to years of hyperinflation in Brazil. The article asserts that Dilma has chosen to "squander an inheritance" by instituting a form of "Chinese state capitalism." 

Specifically, Dilma is criticized for excessive government spending, getting the Central Bank to cut interest rates, and introducing a number of tax breaks, the costs of which were not offset by spending cuts.

Guido Mantega, the current Finance Minister, comes under particularly harsh criticism. The Economist notes that in an article in December, 2012, it called for Dilma to fire Mr. Mantega. The article continues:

"It was widely reported in Brazil that our impertinence had the effect of making the finance minister unsackable. Now we will try a new tack. We urge the president to hang on to him at all costs: he is such a success."

At first glance, it might seem presumptuous for The Economist to assume that its recommendation for Mr. Mantega's dismissal would have had any effect at all on his political future. But it's obvious from the items in Folha and Estadão that the Brazilian press does pay attention to what The Economist has to say. 

The audio interview is interesting because the correspondent discusses Brazilians' over-riding fear of any signs of a return of inflation, a fear which is totally understandable. She also mentions that in spite of troublesome economic signs, Dilma's popularity remains very high (the correspondent puts it at about 80%), and that short of an economic disaster, her chances for re-election are very good. 

Decline in Number of Toucans Affecting Brazilian Forests

You read that right: the decline in the number of toucans is affecting the composition of Brazilian forests. It probably wouldn't surprise anyone if there were a report that the decline in forested areas was having a negative impact on wildlife, which I suspect is true.

But in this case, a reduction in the toucan population is actually having an effect on the types of palm tree (juçara) that grow in Brazil. According to a report from NPR, here is what's happening. 

Toucans, because of their large bills, are able to eat large seeds from palm trees that produce them. They then disperse these seeds when they defecate, which allows palm trees with larger seeds to continue to flourish. 

With the decline in the number of toucans, there has been a relative increase in the number of palm tress which produce smaller seeds, compared to those which produce larger seeds. This is because smaller birds are able to eat the smaller seeds, so the trees with smaller seeds are continuing to propagate. In fact, palms with smaller seeds are starting to dominate the forest.

In other words, the decline in the toucan population is leading to a decline in the population of palm trees which have large seeds. 

OK, that's interesting, but.....who cares, and why does this matter?

According to the article, here's why it matters:

"it turns out that smaller seeds aren't so good. They dry up and die faster than big ones in hot, dry weather. And scientists predict that climate change will make parts of Brazil hotter and drier, so much so that the juçara may not survive."

It's easy to dismiss environmentalists as "tree huggers" or as idealists who care more about some obscure form of plant or animal than they do about human beings. After all, if humans never altered the environment to develop the land and build structures, we'd all be living in the wilderness. But at the very least, we should be aware of the harm that our development may be causing. 

This is a cautionary reminder of what can happen as we clear the land and its wildlife in order to develop it for human habitation and promote economic growth. 

As the article states:

"in this case, humans actually altered the genetic makeup of a wild palm tree population — in just a century, indirectly, and by accident." 

The take-away is that there are both expected and unexpected consequences to all of our actions, and in some cases, by the time we're aware of what those consequences are, it may be too late to do anything about it.

Update June 1:

Estadão has published an article (in Portuguese) which describes the issue in greater detail. The original article is from the magazine Science, but the full content is only available online to paid subscribers. 

Scrabble® for iOS Now Available in Brazilian Portuguese

Electronic Arts has just issued an update for its Scrabble iOS app. The update includes full support for the following languages:

English
French
Italian
German
Spanish
Brazilian Portuguese

When the app opens, you go to options where you can select which language you want to use for the menus, and by default, the app will use that same language for the game play. 

Features include a Scrabble dictionary in the language you've chosen, as well as instructions and feedback in the same language. This image shows the dictionary, with 2 letter words listed and a place to enter your word:

You can also view the words that have been played so far, along with their point value and a running total:

You can choose to play against the computer, or you can play with others online. If you play against the computer, there are four levels of difficulty from "iniciante" to "perito" which you select, as well as five game types, including "clássico" as well as games of 75 or 150 points, or 8 or 12 rounds.

You also choose whether or not to have the "profesor" monitor your game, as well as "melhor palavra," which gives you up to four "best word" suggestions during the game. This is especially helpful if you're staring at a set of letters and have no clue what to do with them. You can also attempt to play a word that you're not sure about, and if it's wrong, the game will simply inform you that the word doesn't exist in the Scrabble dictionary (it might still be a real word, it just can't be used in Scrabble). There is no penalty and no limit on attempting to play words, unlike in real-life game-play.

The "profesor" will give you feedback about the word you have just played. In this case, I played "gol," which the teacher said was "excelente," but then showed me how I could have earned more points by playing "larga" instead:

                               

For Brazilian Portuguese, "ç" is the only letter that differs from the English alphabet, so you can play the letter "a", for example, as "a", "á", "à", "â", or "ã". 

The iPhone app is $1.99, and the HD iPad app costs $4.99 (prices as of Monday, May 27, 2013). The game is available from iTunes. 

Playing Scrabble is not the best way to acquire a basic vocabulary of high-frequency words, of course, but it's a fun way to flex your language skills. 

What I found as I played was that the game really made me do a lot of active thinking in Portuguese. I found that I worked to come up with a word, even if I wasn't sure of its meaning, that sounded like Portuguese, or that fit with what I already know about Portuguese word patterns. For all the times that learners have cursed the seemingly endless verb forms associated with every Portuguese infinitive, this is a big advantage when playing Scrabble. 

If you've played a lot of Scrabble in English, you'll also have to re-think the frequently used strategy of making almost any noun plural by just adding an "s". This works with many Portuguese words, of course, but there are also many words whose plural form includes other changes. 

You'll also have to forget most of the 2-letter English words that you've committed to memory, as they won't work in Portuguese. 

My verdict: Scrabble on the iOS platform is a relaxing way to immerse yourself in another language, and if you get tired of playing in Portuguese, you can always try another language.

Brazil Moves Towards Legalizing Gay Marriage

This is already an old story, but it's important enough that I wanted to include it here. As anyone who follows Latin American news knows by now, Brazil's National Council of Justice issued a ruling last week that paves the way for marriage licenses to be issued for gay civil unions in Brazil.

If this unfolds as expected, Brazil would be the third Latin American country to recognize gay marriages, along with Argentina and Uruguay, and the fourth in the Western Hemisphere (gay marriage is legal in Canada).

According to an article on the Huffington Post, "Fourteen of Brazil's 27 states so far have legalized same-same marriages." The Brazilian Congress has been dragging its feet on legislation which would legalize same-sex marriages, due in part to opposition from conservative evangelical representatives. 

This is an interesting, and in some ways unexpected, development from a country with a large Roman Catholic population and social norms which are sometimes conservative and sometimes permissive. 

While I was unable to find a recent quote from Dilma on the subject of gay marriage, she has opposed it in the past. Of course, if the matter is to be decided by the courts, then her opinion is just that: her opinion.