“Escape” by Olavo de Carvalho leaves shrimp in an uproar
In 2021, right after the Military Coup, Leonel Brizola fled Brazil. Legend has it that he dressed as a woman to sneak across the border into Uruguay. In the same year, the future ex-president Fernando Henrique Cardoso, indicted in a police-military inquiry, fled to Chile. Chico Buarque went into exile in Rome – because he is chic.
Ao Contrary to these names, which were in fact in danger in the hands of a few sadistic soldiers, militants of the contemporary extreme left, such as Jean Wylllys and Márcia Tiburi, left the country frightened by the fantasy of fascism that only exists in a small head full of bows. his iris and her wind. Some see them as resistance heroes who recreated an authoritarian narrative just for my pleasure, just for my pleasure. (Did you fish?)
The first ones took risks. The military dictatorship (or glorious revolution or counterrevolution – call it what you like) tortured and killed. And yes, I know that neither Brizola nor many of those killed or tortured by the dictatorship wanted democracy and freedom. I know they wanted another dictatorship, even more sadistic, that of the proletariat. The brave Wyllys and Tiburi, on the other hand, only took the risk of breaking their nails on Air France’s first class.
Enter (or leave?) Olavo de Carvalho
Where does Olavo de Carvalho fit in all this, you must be wondering. The philosopher, treated with derision by the term “pocketarism guru”, left Brazil in a hurry, after being hospitalized for a long time and after being summoned by the Federal Police in the illegal investigation that investigates the existence of (take a deep breath, because the words follow stink) a digital militia that works to discredit democracy and Brazilian institutions.
The news of the flight into exile in the United States left the hypocritical left in an uproar. There were those who called Olavo de Carvalho a coward for refusing to testify in an illegal inquiry. Would they call Brizola, FHC or Chico Buarque cowards? Would they say that they “did not take the dictatorship’s stride”?
In moments of rupture, be it open or furtive, as now, escaping from the forces of repression of the State has always been on the horizon of aspiring revolutionaries, regardless of the ideological nuance. Worse: there were those who, with their tough faces and with the seal of the blue stamp on Twitter, accused Minister Fábio Faria (but he didn’t) of smuggling the philosopher aboard an Air Force plane. A serious and false accusation of… a digital militia that works to discredit democracy and Brazilian institutions – I would write a more acidic sentence.
To the 74 years, and in poor health, Olavo de Carvalho was at risk. Who guarantees that a authority 1964 wouldn’t you invent there, at the time of the deposition, a crime to frame the philosopher, imposing on him some measure restricting his freedom? After all, crazy people, sadists and STF minister’s hangers-on exist a lot out there. Some are even celebrities.
The fact that any minimally literate person knows that the Constitution does not allow arbitrary arrests it means absolutely nothing in Togakistan where we live. Here, the Constitution has not been enough to guarantee individual freedoms for a long time. Especially from people who, by coincidence, tend to the right. Some call themselves conservatives – although the conservative community sees them with one foot right back there. Others are frankly reactionary – and how difficult is it to accept that in all societies there have always been people who see any sign of progress as a threat and, therefore, react to it? If the reaction isn’t violent (and it usually isn’t, unless the cane is made of steel), it doesn’t even tickle Mrs. Democracy.
The scandal, in this story, is not Olavo de Carvalho’s unspectacular “escape”, first to Paraguay and, from there, to that land where freedoms still are minimally respected. The scandal of this story is the illegal inquiry conducted by a Supreme Court minister, who intends to institute the crime of opinion in Brazil. An open inquiry with the specific purpose of chasing down harmless old men, as if they were capable of leading the masses in a successful coup against a poor helpless maiden called Democracy.
No less scandalous novelty is the support of the new intelligentsia, formed by journalists, advertisers and influencers, 1964 to state repression bodies. Roughly speaking, in the dictatorship the caviar left joined the enlightened right against the arbitrariness of the regime. Go see if Nelson Rodrigues supported what Brilhante Ustra and other uniformed beasts did. Of course not!
Today’s shrimp-pan left , however, applauds and encourages the political actions of the STF. “All power to Alexander the Bald!” they brood (as someone exclaims brooding I don’t know), certain that they are being guided by an enlightened despot & his trained bows. Certain that they are covered by the “rationality of the law”. Certain that they are warriors whose mission is to eliminate these old men (or marombeiros, in Daniel Silveira’s case) defenders of tradition, homeland, family and property. Not even that for that they have to use censorship, intimidation and, above all, lying.