Throughout the week, two unrelated movements put Bolsonarism in the spotlight again, both in the traditional press and on social media: those of and a , former director of and convicted, among other crimes, of attempting to abolish the Democratic Rule of Law.
Since the stab wound he suffered in 2018, former president Jair Bolsonaro has lived with recurring complications, which periodically lead him to medical procedures. This time, under clinical guidance, he was authorized to undergo two interventions — one related to an inguinal hernia and the other to persistent hiccups. Yet the medical fact was quickly reconfigured as a political fact.
In the more than 100,000 public Telegram groups monitored by Palver, the majority reaction was support for the former president. Among the messages that took a clear position on the episode, around 76% expressed support for Bolsonaro, while 24% were critical or skeptical.
Support was organized around already known narratives, such as the idea that the former president was being “tortured” by the system, that there was a deliberate plan to lead him to his death, or that judicial decisions were putting his life at risk.
Critical messages were a minority, but not non-existent. They tend to question the dramatization of the clinical picture or to suggest that the health condition is being politically instrumentalized.
In the second case, the escape of central characters from Bolsonarism once again came to light after the frustrated attempt by Silvinei Vasques. The fact caused them to be remembered, like those of Allan dos Santos, and, expanding the debate on loyalty, victimization and accountability. In the groups analyzed, the pattern is repeated, although with nuances. Among the messages that took a stance on these cases, 66% showed support for the fugitives, while 34% expressed rejection or irony.
Supporters tend to frame the escapes as acts of self-preservation in the face of a Judiciary perceived as politicized, with much of the criticism focused on Minister Alexandre de Moraes. The central argument is that there would be no possibility of a fair trial in Brazil, which would justify leaving the country. In some cases, flight is described as a legitimate strategy in the face of a “persecuting state”; in others, as a personal sacrifice in the name of a greater cause.
On the other side, an ironic narrative is growing, more frequent in critical or oppositional messages, which labels the group as “runaways”. This reading associates the “macho” and confrontational rhetoric, cultivated over recent years, with behavior that would be contradictory in the face of convictions. Furthermore, they point out that these characters would have been abandoned by Jair Bolsonaro. There are responses from the right to this framing, but they do not seek to deny the escape itself, but to reframe it as an inevitable consequence of a system that, in the view of supporters, would have previously condemned these actors.
The general scenario suggests that, despite the setbacks, Bolsonarism remains strong on social media. This vigor, however, remains largely restricted to its most loyal audience. Narratives circulate with high intensity, but with low spillover capacity beyond the bubble. The balance could shift if future events are able to engage the general public, forcing a broader stance. Until then, the movement demonstrates discursive resilience, but little capacity to bring anything new to the debate.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
