I have a Celta 2008, I live for rent in a city in the interior of São Paulo and recently I bet on a small enterprise, in order to subsist with more comfort, and, thus, buy the clothes my wife finds on this Instagram, the toys my stepson sees on Shopee, and my son’s diapers which literally don’t contribute to any cost savings here at home. Obviously my other performances give me some financial comfort. For example, I sometimes have the luxury of being able to travel with the family on the weekend, I can buy books without my wife knowing, and I can flaunt my collection of four pipes and international tobaccos – bought legally. For all that, for Lula, I am a “capitalist pig”, a middle class petty bourgeois who perpetuates this system of exploitation and – as he says – “offers a standard of living above what is necessary”. Clearly Lula has not yet overcome the already completely antiquated – even for the left – Karl Marx, much less deign to look in the existential mirror to realize that today he is one of those who have some 40 years I would call him a “rogue bourgeois”.
I very much doubt that the former president has read Karl Marx, perhaps not even Engels has read beyond the Manifesto of the Communist Party and its tedious editorial collaborations. If Lula had read, for example, A Ideologia Alemã, he would have seen that the analogical left’s hatred of the middle class comes precisely from the obvious success and benefits that capitalist industrialization has brought to the average Afghans in Europe. Literally, people who lived on a subsistence basis began to have access to goods that not even the richest kings and aristocrats of the 16th century would have dreamed of having.
For Marx, this new class of people who began to having goods, benefits and salaries that they would never be able to acquire in their manufactures in the countryside, ended up preventing the natural celerity of the socialist revolt, the “imminent communist revolution”. He – the German – told that capitalism would inject the workers with hatred towards their masters and that, just as the slaves yearned to massacre their masters, the workers would naturally dream of trampling their masters underfoot. Well, as we have seen, it didn’t happen… In this way, the Communist Revolution, for Marx, did not happen according to his predictions because the middle class prevented it. This is where this old communist hatred comes from, this is where this dogma that Lula repeats with an air of moral superiority comes from.
This same middle class, today mostly made up of workers and micro/small entrepreneurs, they only denied the theses of Marx and his later sycophants, as they formed a kind of natural resistance against progressive theses. Bastião and Dona Ana “shitted” about the academic theses of the Frankfurt School; they do not tolerate progressive inventions, nor do they believe that the state is some kind of political messiah. On the contrary, the middle class generally craved the material culture and social status of the aristocracy, while at the same time flaunting the pious faith of the poor, thus becoming the social link. that haunts the idealism of the traditional left, for its atavistic rejection of the ideological constructs of left ideologues. These ideologues who, in one fell swoop, wanted to undermine aristocratic culture and religious morals.
The left just hates my clan… and I think that’s fabulous!
However, the most fabulous thing will always be the pompous hypocrisy of the reactionary left that in the morning cries hugging beggars and at night burps caviar at Lula’s wedding. It is a worthy sport to follow how the dissimulated speech does not even move the momentum of the most staunch militants of leftist ideology. In drinks alone, the ex-convict/president’s wedding may have cost 100 one thousand reais – according to Lula’s advice, “everything was paid for by the bride and groom”; the honeymoon was at a five-star hotel, Grand Mercure, which costs around 3,000 reais per night; and, to finish, the lovebirds must live in a NOBRE neighborhood of São Paulo, Alto Pinheiros, in a property of 700 square meters valued at 5 million reais. According to Oeste Magazine, the couple will be tenants, the rent will cost around 20, 5 thousand per month to the proletarian Lula.
The ironic The coherence that we can extract from this is that Lula is not really from the middle class, he is clearly from the aristocracy, or, as he himself called it, from the “slavery elite”. Another coherence, in turn, lies in the model of luxurious life that he will lead, very close to what his idols, Mao Tse-Tung, Fidel Castro and Nicolás Maduro lead or led in their respective subjugated countries.
I’m here thinking, in my new president office chair, in installments in 12 x without interest, how the possession of this good – according to petismo – makes me an enemy of poverty and an executioner of the miserable, and like just a bottle of champagne from Lula’s wedding, valued between 800 and 1.40 reais, in addition to of not making him a “capitalist pig” I could still buy my chair in cash… With twelve or thirteen bottles of these, we could easily do business on my Celta.
How do the brain lobes of a PT militant, there is a research that I would personally finance. And, in addition to my eternal irony, the essence of the questioning is profoundly sincere: how to combine the words, the classic convictions of the Marxist petismo, that Lula resurrects for these elections, and his glamorous real life? It seems to me that, in the same way that the 19th and 20th century workers are an example of how capitalism and the free market created a frightening material prosperity, Lula has become a perfect example of how socialism is based on galloping hypocrisy, on a hypnotic blindness. that borders on religious fanaticism.
As long as my Celt and my small luxuries are the country’s economic problem, and the bizarre and hypocritical luxury of the father of Brazilian socialism is solemnly ignored, the national left and its media troupe will suffer from this hideous infantilization of their speeches. Lula has a childish, delayed, hypocritical and silly speech. I sincerely believe that, in order to reject Lula’s ideas, it is only necessary to look at his life in parallel with his speeches.
