[flagged]
That’s not quite true; Germany censors tons of speech, and nobody would ever call them a dictatorship. Same is true for the UK and plenty of other countries, where the press is definitely “managed” and people can get thrown in jail for the things they say.
Censorship is one aspect of dictatorship, but not all censorship implies dictatorship.
I expect the persecution to get worse.
You don’t realize, but your bias is showing, kid.
Bias? I don't give a shit, "kid". Do you have any idea what it feels like to have a president you know is a criminal rule over you? It's one thing to suspect, it's another thing to know. And he will rule over us, regardless of elected congress or senate, because the supreme court judges will force whatever law he wants into effect. Do you have any idea what it feels like to watch videos of prisoners cheering and drug traffickers celebrating with gunfire after his victory?
Yes, actually, we had 4 years of it from 2016-2020, and it came very close to not ending when he lost the 2020 election but never conceded.
Of course not. You want me to post them or something? I had links, they were all taken down but I saved them.
> The only thing I see is a desperate attemp to argue in favour of Bolsonaro’s disastrous goverment with all the “far-right whatsapp” playbook.
I don't even support Bolsonaro. I just don't support your president either.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/world/americas/brazil-onl...
Lula had his time, when the world was a lot different.
Anyway, I hope he doesn’t tank the beautiful country and full of potential Brasil is.
Tamos juntos!
I agree with you. I don't really support Bolsonaro, I wish we had better candidates. I'm just so sad to see this communist become president again.
Sorry, this is just the kind of exaggerated rhetoric that made the situation to become polarised like this.
I really encourage you to stop propagating this kind of nonsense.
Yes, but more importantly, many in Brazil are not really aware of their privileges and the biggest challenge of this presidency will be trying to reduce inequalities, despite being a cause that many - as seen in this commenting thread - don’t support and simply label as “communism”.
Seriously, dude?
I really encourage you not to reply to me again.
What is to say that hasn’t happened to Lula?
I think these videos are not even a couple years old. While it is theoretically possible that he changed his mind, I wouldn't bet on it.
https://youtu.be/HzAr4WpYAow?t=2884
> Human beings must understand that they have limitations.
> We have to define what each of us needs.
> Let's write a theory on what human beings need to survive.
> Does he need a car? Okay, he'll have a car.
> Does he need a beach house? Okay, he'll have a beach house.
> Does he need a rural home? Okay, he'll have a rural home.
> Three pairs of shoes? Okay.
> It gets to a point where he no longer has needs, so he shouldn't accumulate money.
> What is someone going to store 130 billions of dollars for?
> What is he going to do? When he dies?
> Let some parasites who never worked keep the money?
> While the people are hungry?
It's so anodyne, you could have titled it with "CNN interviews Pope Francis," and people would have believed it.
"All there is?" This is communist speech and ideology. Don't minimize it. See my other reply here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34214909
> a far cry from "the government will decide whether you need shoes."
Are you sure? This is a president that decades ago openly stated his objective was the slow installation of socialism in Brazil. Then the possiblity that he had changed his mind since then was raised. I presented to you a two year old video of him defending basic communist ideology. He hasn't changed his mind.
Do you have any doubt at all that this guy wants a communist government that decides such things for its citizens?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism
> This distinction can be observed in Marx's communism, where the distribution of products is based on the principle of "to each according to his needs"
> As the productive forces continued to advance, the communist society, i.e. a classless, stateless, humane society based on common ownership, follows the maxim "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_abi...
> Nothing in society will belong to anyone, either as a personal possession or as capital goods, except the things for which the person has immediate use, for either his needs, his pleasures, or his daily work.
Certainly seems to be the case everyone who voted for him was hoping for but I don't think so. He's already tried this communist stuff in previous mandates. Check out this "human rights" plan his party tried to push in 2009-2010:
https://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2010/05/presidente-alt...
Relativization of private property: you own land, someone invades your land and settles on it and you're forced to "mediate" with the invaders before being afforded access to the justice system. Regulation of all media and communications, censorship in case of "abuse" and even a government ranking of media channels based on how much they conform to "human rights". Prohibition of religious symbols in public. Taxation of fortunes because entrepreneurship in Brazil apparently wasn't difficult enough.
Even the media that supported him now used to criticize him harshly for this, to the point he backed down. I think they were all hoping he'd be the "moderate, reasonable" Lula who backs down once again but why would he back down now? He's old, cancerous and with pretty much nothing to lose. I saw prominent figures regret supporting him before he even took power.
He's gonna do the same thing again. It's probably his last chance to create the socialist Brazil he always wanted. He was already developing this agenda even before he took power and this time he's gonna succeed because he's got supreme court judges backing him. Congress and senate are powerless, the supreme court can just determine anything it wants and it becomes de facto law. I saw those judges talk about relativization of private property during the election, they even used that exact word.
After leaving jail, Lula talked many times about how much he regretted not regulating the media when he had the chance and how it's one of the very first things he's gonna do once in power. It was hilarious to see the press support a president that says stuff like this.