Every year it happens. Finished, the most shameless meeting of Brazilian institutional corruption, laudatory texts are published. A free, self -delayed choreography of contemporary consciousness and rationalization of the “new times”.
In the effort to legitimize extravagance, they deviate from the legal, political and ethical discussion that conditions any other weighting about the event. They divert the preliminaries that matter. The eloquent silence shouts condescension. Stock out is strategic. Unintentionally, confesses.
No word about conflicts of interest and lack of financial transparency. We know and private sponsors, but nothing about how much or who. We know that all private sponsors have immediate or eventual interest in court decisions. We know that the privileged company of ministers subvert and unbalances access to justice and due process.
No word about something even more elementary: Is it appropriate to gather, in a private event, organized by a minister company, surrounded by lobbyists from various economic sectors, the highest legal and political authorities in the country? The fact that you are unaware of something similar in the world should raise at least doubt.
No wonder how much this convergence of interests dilutes institutions and excludes other interests. Not coincidentally, he excludes interests from those groups who participate in this story with only one resource: the fundamental right. The right to freedom, earth, health, decent work, the way of life.
The thin resource that remained to vulnerable does not enter the gated community by transatlantic walls and magistocratic gates.
In this replacement of the public with the private, in this wicked correlation between institutionalization of the private and deinstitutionalization of the public, the result is already known beforehand. No risk of defeat.
The journalist formulated the most candid description of the meeting. For her, the forum “articulated solutions for real impasses of Brazilian politics” and “consolidated as a legitimate space for formulation, influence and institutional articulation”. There would have been “less performance and more backstage work, more articulation than self -promotion”. Not only “good lines”, but “important seams”.
He noticed a “informal center of Brazilian political mediation”: “In the corridors, the work also ran out of the spotlight.” Alexandre de Moraes would have been an example: “Even with appointments on stage, it spent much of the time sewing, out of office. It was from Lisbon that he hit the hammer for conciliation.”
The location abroad “contributes to its effectiveness” because “” physical and symbolic detachment of Brasilia reduces the temperature of the debates and favors frank conversations. ” According to her, it wasn’t for it, it wasn’t like that, none of this would be possible.
No one had managed to synthesize so accurately: “From the joke to the institution.” That’s it, an institution, not a joke. A private, camouflaged, manipulative institution. On the fringes of the constitutional agreement.
To magistrates, lawyers and ministers who refused to presence for ethical discernment and institutional conscience, we thank the thread of hope.
Receive the medal of those who were not. Until 2026.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
