Nov 15 2024 | Nº. 143

Editorial

On Wednesday, November 13 night, two explosions occurred at night outside the Supreme Court (STF) in Brasília.  The suspect behind the attack, identified as Francisco Wanderley Luiz, was killed in the conflagration, which authorities have shown was a clearly political act of violence. Luiz, who reportedly worked as a locksmith from Santa Catarina, ran unsuccessfully for city council in 2020 as a member of former president Jair Bolsonaro’s Liberal Party (PL). Family and friends report that he was radicalized in the years since, threatening to kill Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, the jurist that has drawn the most ire from the former president’s most extreme supporters. While there had been some talk of a potential amnesty for those arrested for their role in the January 8, 2023 insurrection—and even possibly for Bolsonaro himself following the election of Donald Trump—it seems universally acknowledged that this week’s terrorist attack effectively foreclosed that already remote prospect. While the actual damage was limited, the explosion is a fiery reminder of the nation’s polarization between President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s broad coalition ranging from the center to the left and Bolsonaro’s far-right supporters.

The far right in Brazil remains enthusiastic about President-Elect Donald Trump’s early cabinet picks, including Florida Senator Marco Rubio for secretary of state. Rubio, the son of Cuban migrants, has long been a prominent critic of left-wing governments in Latin America. His elevation to chief diplomat of the United States could produce significant friction with Brazil. Rubio was once a vehement Trump critic, so he is not as close to some in the incoming president’s orbit as other potential nominees. Still, many in Lula’s government likely wish Trump had picked someone less invested in Latin America.  

On Thursday, November 14, Brazil’s armed forces began operations to secure the city of Rio de Janeiro for the G20 Leaders’ Summit scheduled for November 18-19. Under Lula’s authorization, the operation will last until November 21, deploying 7,000 military personnel and 95 members of the National Public Security Force for patrolling and preventive actions around key summit areas, including airports and hotels. The operation aims to ensure public safety and maintain order during the event, with coordination between military, federal police, and other security agencies. Among other leaders, President Joe Biden has confirmed his attendance and announced his intention to visit the Amazon as he prepares to leave office in two months.

Highlights

• Organized Crime. On Friday, November 8, businessman Vinicius Gritzbach was shot dead near the parking area at Guarulhos International Airport in São Paulo, one of the country's main airports, after he had disembarked from a flight. Gritzbach had ties to the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC), Brazil's main criminal faction, and was going to enter into a plea bargain with investigators to reveal information about money laundering schemes and bribery payments to public authorities by the organization. The courts suspect that military police officers were involved in Gritzbach's murder, as he was escorted by officers who apparently failed to act at the time of the execution, which took place in public and in front of the security cameras outside the airport.

• Reduced Working Hours. Congresswoman Erika Hilton from the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL) presented this week a Proposed Constitutional Amendment (PEC) that called for the end of the work week known as 6x1, in which the employee has one day off for every six days worked. The proposal was met with a wave of support on social media, which had an impact on the positioning of politicians from the left and right. Sectors of the Lula’s Workers' Party see the proposal as a chance to reconnect with workers, whose votes have increasingly gone to right-wing candidates. On the other hand, there is fear of erosion of support with the business sector. On the right, many congressional politicians have criticized the initiative, saying that the rules should be the result of negotiation between employers and employees, however, some, sensitive to the trends of voters on social media, have declared their support.

• Presidency of the Chamber. Federal Congressman Hugo Motta, from the right-wing Republican Party, has established himself as the clear favorite to assume the presidency of the lower house Chamber of Deputies in upcoming February elections for the position. He achieved almost unanimous support for his candidacy  after two competitors withdrew from the race and announced their support for Motta. In the Senate, the favorite to head the chamber is David Alcolumbre from União Brasil, also on the right, who this week received formal support from the Workers’ Party. Both candidates are part of a large political group that has been supporting right-wing presidents, such as Michel Temer; far-right presidents, such as Jair Bolsonaro; and left-wing presidents, such as Lula, without distinction. For them, the important thing is to maintain fluid relationships that guarantee access to public budget funds to finance public works and other improvements those places where they receive electoral support.

• Betting Market. Supreme Court Justice Luiz Fux decided this week that the federal government must prohibit citizens who receive money from Bolsa Família, the country's largest income supplement program, as well as the Continuous Benefit Payment (BCP) from using these resources to place sports bets. The decision, which still needs to be confirmed by the Supreme Court as a whole, seeks to address data showing that Bolsa Família beneficiaries spent R$3 billion (US$519,000) on sports betting in August, which represents 20% of the amount transferred by the program in the month.

• Cell phones in schools. The legislative assembly of São Paulo approved a bill on Tuesday, November 12 that prohibits the use of cell phones and other electronic devices in public and private schools in the state. To come into effect, the proposal – which has broad popular support – still needs to be approved by Governor Tarcísio de Freitas. If accepted, the measure will come into effect for the next school year in 2025.

News from the WBO, Organizations and Social Movements

Artistic Freedom. Article 19 released its report “Artistic Freedom from the Perspective of International Human Rights Law” at the headquarters of the Washington Office for Latin America (WOLA) in Washington on Thursday,  November 14 with the participation of WBO and Artists at Risk Connection (ARC), in addition to the support of the Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (REDESCA) of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The document, available at this link, highlights the reasons why artistic freedom should be protected and surveys the international parameters that govern it, as well as its restrictions and limitations.

G20 Social. The Brazil Office promoted a debate at the G20 Social Summit in Rio de Janeiro on Thursday, November 14, entitled “Post-election Scenario in the United States: Perspectives on Climate and Gender in the Global South.” The conversation addressed the prospects for the situation of women – especially after Donald Trump’s election victory in the United States – in the contexts of India, Brazil, and South Africa. The activity is part of a broader initiative called “Feminist Dialogues in Collaboration: Strategic Advocacy Towards the G20”. To learn more, click on this link.

Brazil Unfiltered. In the latest episode of the WBO podcast Brazil Unfiltered, host James N. Green welcomes researcher Camila Rocha from Brazilian Center for Analysis and Planning (CEBRAP) to talk about the national impacts of the 2024 local elections in Brazil. The subject was also the subject of an article published on the WBO website by the executive director of Legisla Brasil, Fernando Haddad Moura, on November 1. Click on this link to read the article or this link to watch the program.

Article from the Pact. Flávia Pellegrino, the executive director of the Pact for Democracy, Arthur Mello, the organization's Advocacy Coordinator, published a joint article in the Wednesday, November 13 edition of the Folha de São Paulo newspaper, in which they refute a text previously published in the same space by former President Jair Bolsonaro. The authors argue that the newspaper in question “has served as a stage for a process that has been going on for some time of normalizing authoritarian leadership and forgetting the anti-democratic and coup conspiracies that we have experienced in recent years.” Read the full content at the link.

Associate researchers. WBO Research Fellow Rafael R. Ioris analyzed the prospects for Brazil and other countries in the region in the context of a new Trump administration in an article for the publication Interesse Nacional and in an interview for the program Terra em Transe. David Nemer, another WBO Research Fellow, gave an interview to the newspaper Folha de São Paulo about the gains made by tycoon Elon Musk with Trump's victory, while a third WBO Research Fellow, Guilherme Casarões, spoke about the implications of the American presidential transition for Brazil on the podcast O Assunto by journalist Natuza Nery. Jana Silverman, who was a 2023/24 WBO Research Fellow, spoke on the podcast Janela Aberta by the Perseu Abramo Foundation.

Feature Article

Considerations on Trump’s victory in 2024

By Vânia Penha-Lopes*

Shortly after 10 p.m. on November 5, 2024, with the vote count in the presidential race between Donald J. Trump and Kamal Harris already underway, I sent a message to a friend from the United States, a sociologist like me, and white: “I think Trump will win.” He promptly replied: “Kamala needs to be a stronger candidate.” I countered: “I think Americans need to be less racist.” He agreed with me.

As in 2016, I went to bed well before the news declared Trump’s victory. However, unlike that election, this time Trump’s victory did not surprise me. In 2016, Hillary Clinton would have been crowned president if it weren't for her defeat in the Electoral College, an institution created in the early days of the country to defend the political interests of slave states by equating each enslaved person – obviously prevented from voting – to three-fifths of a free man.

Although slavery was abolished in the US in 1865, presidential elections continue to be decided by indirect vote: 270 votes are needed in the Electoral College to elect a president. In 2016, Trump garnered 306 votes to Clinton's 232. When he ran for re-election in 2020, Trump got 232 votes to Biden's 206. Trump did not accept his defeat and incited a mob to invade the Capitol on January 6, 2021, the day Congress confirmed Biden's victory. To this day, Trump and his co-religionists maintain their “victory.” In 2024, there was no need for that. Trump won a landslide victory in the Electoral College: 312 to 226. He also received 50.5% of the popular vote, or almost 4 million votes ahead of Kamala Harris. Part of his success is due to the fact that he won in all the “swing states” or “battlefield states,” so called because their voters are not committed to either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. Therefore, depending on the election, they can swing in either direction, thus establishing a battleground for the parties. These are Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina and Florida, on the East Coast; in the Midwest, Ohio, Minnesota, Michigan and Iowa; Nevada and Colorado in the West complete the picture.

This result did not surprise me for three reasons: first, despite all the incoherent and unfounded statements that Trump made throughout the campaign, the polls put him neck and neck with Kamala Harris. If a white woman was not elected in 2016, why would a non-white woman be elected in 2024? Finally, part of the electorate historically loyal to the Democratic Party was showing signs of coming around to Trump's promises.

Among Trump's unfounded statements, his constant attacks on Harris's ethnic-racial identity stand out, claiming that she had always said she was Indian, but when she ran for president, she declared herself Black, which would make her a liar and a profiteer. In fact, during her public life, first as a prosecutor in California, then as a senator for the same state, and as vice president, Harris mentioned that her mother, although Indian, raised her two daughters as Black, because she knew that was how society would treat them.

Even more insidious was the claim that Trump made during the debate with Harris, on September 10 of this year: “They're eating the dogs! They're eating the cats! They're eating the pets of the people who live there!” “They” were Haitian immigrants who lived in Springfield, Ohio. Despite the debate moderator’s claim that there was no evidence of this, Trump insisted that it was true. The fact that Haitians were Black cannot be ignored. Since 2016, Trump has included banning non-white immigrants in his plan to “Make America Great Again.”

As I argued in my book The Presidential Elections of Trump and Bolsonaro, Whiteness, and the Nation (2022), Trump’s election in 2016 “reflected the racially hierarchical structure of their societies as well as the strength of the white supremacist ideology that is necessary for that structure to remain in place despite efforts to dismantle it.” Votes from white women and men, regardless of class, pointed to racial resentment that had been evident since the 1970s, in part due to affirmative action policies.

In 2024, these trends repeated themselves on a larger scale, dispelling the idea that Barack Obama’s election and reelection had made the country “post-racial.” Trump repeated his misogynistic tendencies in 2024, calling Harris “stupid” and promising to “protect women even against their will.” He also appealed to Black and Latino voters when he began claiming that immigrants take their jobs. Before that, he had become one with Black men by calling himself a “victim” of the criminal justice system after being found guilty of fraud in May of this year. As a result, the percentage of Nlack Republican voters, which has been increasing since 2016, grew in 2024. While more than 90% of black women supported Harris, close to 20% of black men voted for Trump. Latinos, who had supported Trump more than expected in 2016, increased their support for him in 2024, in part due to the performance of men under 45, who, like young Nlacks, believe that Trump will promote a more robust job market.

Trump also courted the Jewish vote by declaring that those who did not vote for him should be vetted, that Harris hates Israel and that only he can protect its interests. Predominantly Democratic voters, Jews overwhelmingly voted for Harris, although conservative sources say only 61 percent voted for her, progressive sources report 78 percent support for Harris.

Overall, a Trump victory in 2024 signals an electoral realignment, with much of the population shifting to the right, and away from socialist policies toward the individualism that has characterized U.S. history. The scapegoating of immigrants also brings to mind the nativist movement of the 1920s that resulted in the closure of the U.S. borders for 41 years.

*Vânia Penha-Lopes is a professor of Sociology at Bloomfield College of Montclair State University, co-chair of the Columbia University Seminar on Brazil, and research fellow at the Washington-Brazil Office.

Feature articles express the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editors or WBO.