Dear Gleisi Hoffmann,
I received your letter with surprise and joy (shorturl.at/YEAQ1). I write to you, also privately, to express hope and a confession.
The hope: that one day, finally, the PT will move away from its economic dogma. I never doubted his intelligence, not even that of Lula or the other PT leaders. I’m not a politician, but I imagine it would be very difficult to review articles of faith. However, Brazil needs this.
For some time now, the PT has not been socialist – let alone communist! In fact, perhaps it never was. I am a conservative, but I recognize your party as one of the most relevant national political currents. It is high time for you to update your economic thinking, without renouncing your left-wing soul.
The left, I think, is not distinguished by its superstitious belief in the magical power of public spending, but by its fight against poverty and inequalities. Why flirt with inflation, a hidden tax that vandalizes the popular economy?
Galípolo in charge of the BC may trigger urgent reflections on the laws of the economy, the inflation target system and the need for coordination between fiscal and monetary policies. I dream, who knows, but I await the day when your letter can become a public document. Irreducible militancy would struggle, but the historical review would propel the PT to soar in the post-Lula stage.
You ventured out of sincerity. I follow your example. Confession: I made a lot of mistakes. Not in monetary policy decisions or fiscal policy statements. My mistake was to mix things up: as president of the BC, I had no right to act as a poster boy for Bolsonarism.
I speak of law in the broad, “philosophical” sense. Every citizen can express their political preferences. However, when I went to vote wearing a yellow t-shirt (and on other occasions) I violated an unwritten rule about the BC’s place in Brazil’s institutional architecture. The autonomous BC has no party – and, therefore, its president is ethically prohibited from engaging in politics during his term of office.
It’s worse. The president I supported dedicated his time in Planalto to conspiring against democracy. I will avoid the (raggedy) excuse of your support for the Maduro dictatorship: one shameful gesture does not redeem another. Supposedly, liberals abhor tyrannies, as they are convinced that economic and political freedoms are indivisible. In practice, the rule included notable exceptions: Milton Friedman and Pinochet, my grandfather and Castelo/Geisel, among others. Do you and I really believe in the principle of democratic government?
Your letter brought to mind the word “destiny”. You, who have Lula’s trust, wasted the opportunity to align the PT with the concept of fiscal balance defended by Haddad – just to guarantee the applause of the left wing. I, who frustrated Bolsonaro by fulfilling his duty to raise the Selic rate in 2022, wasted the chance to stay away from Bolsonaro politics – just to win the applause of the authoritarian right. Self-sabotage – is this our shared destiny?
According to Marx (ops, I quote Marx, not Mises!), we make our destiny, in circumstances that we do not control. How about, in the new year, we sabotage self-sabotage?
At.te, Roberto Campos Neto, already ex.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
