Brazil has long felt the need for a nationalist leader, a patriotic leader. Brazil has long been missing someone who truly understands, loves and wants the best for the country. Because nothing will change without a figure of this kind and the desire for radical changes by way of this patriotism.
From each elected president or from each newly elected parliament, we are witnesses of such disgrace that we repeat to ourselves or to one another: “Ah, if only there were some nationalist leading us …”.
But in the 90’s, in fact, a figure appeared that brought together many of these characteristics desired in a Brazilian leader. Eneas Carneiro was a man of the people, of high intelligence, who knew the country well, who had the greatest esteem for it and who, therefore, wanted the best for it.
But everyone laughed at him. Year after year he was treated as the “comic relief” of the electoral process. The mass, superficial, frivolous and gossipy (and semi-literate or functionally illiterate) paid more attention to his “Wagnerian” presentation than to the content of his discourses. His emphatic way of speaking was understood more as a symptom of madness than of conviction.
Nevertheless, in the speeches of Aeneas, we can find all the information and all the proposals that we needed at the time and that we still need. Atomic bomb, recovery of strategic state, rejection of globalism, criticism of neoliberal monetary and exchange policy, denunciation of international division of labor, defense of labor rights, affirmation of heteronormativity, refutation of gender ideology, criticism of usury, contempt for political division right / left, etc.
One could doubt whether it would have been possible for him to make all the necessary reforms to the country, since much of politics depends on politicking. But it can not be doubted that he possessed the right stances on virtually every issue.
This lack, real but also affective, mixed with a feeling of guilt for the way that Aeneas was treated, has to do with the blindness that Jair Bolsonaro, antithesis of Enéas Carneiro, as nationalist.
In common, the two have only a certain conservatism, which in Enéas is scientifically and culturally well founded, while in Bolsonaro this conservatism is nothing more than a cluster of superficial cliches. Except for this, there is absolutely nothing in common between the two.
And yet, Jair Bolsonaro decided to take the position of “heir” of Enéas. This is as hypocritical, fallacious and shameful as Lula takes the position of heir to Getúlio Vargas. In both cases, this is a great farce, a farce that only serves to deceive the idiots or caress the guilty conscience of the “Pharisees” who mocked Enéas throughout his political career.
Because you can not make mistakes about it. There are practically no Eneas voters who intend to vote in Bolsonaro. The overwhelming majority of Bolsonaro voters are (besides post-teens) the same sort of the “Pharisees” who voted for FHC, Lula, Serra and now appear suddenly as “patriots” invoking the memory of Eneas Carneiro.
Enéas Carneiro turns in the tomb whenever his image is associated with the crude, ignoble, Zionist, surrendering, liberal, Americanophile, servile and globalist figure of Jair Bolsonaro.
FREEDOM! JUSTICE! REVOLUTION!