Timeline issues (2)

Protests in São Paulo, Brasília, and Rio de Janeiro. (From Wikipedia)

Once again, with the protests that happened last Sunday, people on social media are up in arms about it and as divided as ever. I thought after the election things would go back to “normal,” but little did I know that there isn’t going to be a “normal” any more. Things just escalate. I think the solution is unfollowing, rather than unfriending.

The example in point: a person on my timeline posted the following picture (actually others have posted it as well):

Roughly translating, it reads: “Salvador, the “blackest” capital city in Brazil. Find the black person…”

The following exchange ensues in the comment section. There are 32 entries and I roughly translated them. I have added some punctuation and capital letters just to be more presentable, and tried to adapt to English the senseless ways sentences are structured in Portuguese. The participants are: (Owner: who posted the picture; A: person that lives in Rio Grande do Sul; B: person that lives in São Paulo; [  ]: my comments)

A: The picture was taken in Bauru, SP. [not Salvador]

B: Good one! LOL

Owner: [posts a link to a blog showing the international media categorizing the protest as “hate festival”]

Owner: It wasn’t different in the rest of Brazil… Don’t feel annoyed about it…

A: I don’t feel annoyed, I just think that before posting a picture you should know if it’s true.

Owner: [posts the following link showing pictures around the country]

Owner: Regardless of the place, you don’t see native Brazilians, black people (rare exceptions), mixed races. Simple…

A: Dude, I don’t know, but as far as I know, even though I am white, my grandparents were mixed-race. So it’s not an “identification’ that will tell me what I look like. This picture is in Rio, Copacabana, I think we can see some people that you mentioned… I don’t see Native Brazilians and I think it’s difficult because most of them don’t vote!

A: I’m in favour of protesting against corruption, regardless of the government. If it’s wrong, they should find the guilty ones and dismiss them, consequently putting them in jail and even demanding the money back. [he posts the following picture]

A: The same international media that informs as a “hate” festival, what can I say about this British guy? Different opinions. [He posts a link to an article about John Oliver’s Last Week Tonight. And if I may leave a personal comment here, “this British guy” is nowadays neck and neck with Jon Stewart in terms of fake-but-actually-true news. A little more respect here!!]

B: (Owner) did you go to any protest? I went to Paulista Ave. and saw many, many black people, mixed-race, old people, children, people with disabilities, LGBT, everything. And did you go and see what?

Owner: Look, it’s different points of view, it would be beating around the bush. (B): everybody has the right to protest, it’s a fact and I respect it. In the past, people who protested got arrested or was tortured, men and women. (A): Nobody wants corruption. I defend the fight against corruption, especially now that finally the Federal Police are investigating and arresting. As I said, it’s different points of view. (B): finally, I didn’t go to a protest, neither in 2013. But you can be sure that I have protested a lot for a more just Brazil and Rio Grande do Sul [our state] and without any influence of internet and media.

B: So let’s isolate the subject…. you post this instigating that the protest was only by white people… but you didn’t even go to see… so…

B: another “friend” posted that the protesters had hateful words about Dilma… and she asked ‘why so much hate for Dilma?’. I just replied ‘why so much love for Dilma?’… Do you know what happened? The post ended… She didn’t reply…

Owner: Jeez, ok (B), it’s not instigation, it’s fact. I was clear previously, “rare exceptions”

B: No, you are wrong again…it wasn’t rare exceptions, at least on Paulista Ave where I was. By the way, I have many black friends who were there as well…

Owner: Look, you are changing my words. About the hate, it’s not only hate for Dilma, the hate is for losing the election, so the hate is towards who voted for Dilma (I’m not partisan).

Owner: Yes, rare exceptions.

B: Nobody on Paulista Ave was complaining about the elections… nobody… I think you should get yourself better informed.

Owner: You know the other day a man told me that “who voted for” Dilma should be electrocuted, all together.

B: There you have it, rare exceptions. By the way, I have many friends that voted for Dilma and they are still my friends. The person who is changing the subject now is you.

Owner: So why are they now imploring for “impeachment?” Have you protested on other occasions?

B: Impeachment wasn’t the main chant, but accountability for the present situation in the country… once again you’re not well-informed.

B: even though there were posters asking for impeachment, it wasn’t the main chant.

B: by the way, a military coup wasn’t the main chant either. At this time there was a resounding “boooo”

Owner: OK (B). I changed it indeed. But just mind what you say or what I wrote because nobody here said or instigated that only white people participated. As I said in the beginning, rare exceptions.

Owner: [posts a link to article about the profile of the protesters.]

B: Ok, I have to go now… have a good afternoon… By the way, I’m referring only to Paulista Ave, where I was and saw it… Not only articles from the internet.

Owner: (B) I’m sorry, but I defend and raise the flag for the ones who really need and depend on social programmes, people in need and who are also “paying expensive bills and taxes” just like you.

Owner: feel free to talk about football and [company name] in other posts! Hug [a normal way to say good-bye in Brazil]

A: Here in Jaguarão [city in the countryside of Rio Grande do Sul] I saw the protest and didn’t see anybody calling people names for voting for Dilma. I think it’s wrong to say “out with Dilma,” I think it would be correct to demand resignation or dismissing the ones found guilty of corruption! But Dilma is the person in charge of our country and I hope she does something about it, because if she doesn’t, in my point of view, it means she has something to do with all the corruption.

A: Demanding “impeachment” is bullshit. It means the person doesn’t know about our history and our laws.

Well, it took me some time to write the dialogue here, but doing this is like expressing my frustration when I (now avoid) read(ing) these posts, it’s the “get it out of my system” way to deal with it. The fascinating thing is the resemblance with the partisan discourse with American politics and the total polarization; it’s the “you are either with me or against me” discourse. There isn’t a centre any more and most importantly nobody gives in, it’s a tug of war that must be won by one side while the other hits the ground and is mercilessly defeated.

During the government response/comments after the protests on Sunday, the minister of the Secretariat-General of the Presidency of the Republic, Miguel Rossetto, stated that people who were protesting did not vote for Dilma Rousseff. First of all, there’s no way to prove that; second, they should be governing to all Brazilians. It’s very troubling when a minister gives such a statement, an example of the partisan discourse that should be avoided especially by the government, any government.

Another thing, this time about the comments of the post, is that there isn’t a focus of debate; whenever each side feels “cornered” they throw the same talking points to dodge a harder argument. One example is to say that “in the past, people who protested got arrested or was tortured, men and women.” I’m glad that those days are gone and truly hope they never come back. But making it the main response to legitimate complaints and concerns and even anger generated by years and years of lack of governance is just laughable. We no longer sacrifice people to appease the gods, but I don’t bring it up in a political reform discussion.

I also think that “[defending and raising] the flag for the ones who really need and depend on social programmes” is important. Millions of people in Brazil have been lifted from poverty and given the opportunity to function in society, acquire goods, live a somewhat better life. However, not addressing the problem of violence — because a dead person can’t enjoy all the benefits — and the dismal health care and education the population is offered is downright absurd. But it seems that they are mutually exclusive: “hey, we’ve given you benefits if you enrolled your children in school, but nobody said it would be well-equipped and that your kids would have well-qualified and well-paid teachers… DUH!”

I again say that unless the discussion is meaningful, constructive and bi-partisan, I will continue to unfollow some folks. The whole exchange should have been:

Owner: [posts picture]

A: The picture was taken in Bauru, SP.

Owner: Sorry, pal. Should have checked the source.

(P.S.: Apparently the owner has deleted the post…)