Siga-me

Roberto Henry Ebelt

In the good old times, when a person had to be able to read and write in order to qualify to participate in the electoral process, people were able to show their discontentment with politicians by voting on an irrational animal, as about 100,000 electors did in São Paulo in 1959, when they elected a rhinoceros to be one of the Members of São Paulo’s City Council. To cast a vote on Cacareco was a meaningful way for people to show the authorities that they were not happy with their representatives and politicians in general, as we still are 51 years later. Cacareco was an irrational animal, as many politicians, but he was not allowed to take over his office, as INCITATUS, Caligula’s horse, was, as a Senator of the Roman Empire. Cacareco got from 20 to 30 votes in each poll (urna ou sessão, in Portuguese) in the City of São Paulo, despite the fact that it was an animal from the Rio de Janeiro’s Zoo.

Nowadays we have to "cope with" the so-called electronic voting machine, fact that makes us excessively vulnerable to the ones in power, because with the present ENTRYISM (aparelhamento) of the Workers Party’s members in every federal administrative office, who knows what results such devices may produce. I would not be surprised if they contained a program of the type "one for you and two for me". Who can be sure that the software of each voting machine has not been modified as to produce a particular result?

The answer is nobody, because there is no way to check whether the results are true or false, as it was possible before the arrival of this devilish device. Haven’t you ever asked yourself why the USA never got interested in or voting devices? Unless the TSE adapts urgently a printer to the electronic voting machine, nobody will ever be able to check whether the final results reflect the will of the Brazilian electorate or not.

The following words of Percival Puggina, which I have translated into English, shed more light upon these aspects

In a rational system, governing a nation is a task that belongs to the party or coalition which holds the majority of representatives.

(Note of the translator: the rational system is not the presidential system. A rational system is more similar to what is known as a parliamentary system).

In the Brazilian governmental system (presidential system under a parliamentary constitution), the elected president is forced to obtain the necessary majority every single day of his term, and such majority is obtained through bribery, by giving away important administrative offices, by the nomination of its allies to be ministers, by accepting the unacceptable, in short, by the full exercise of abominable corruption practices.

Unfortunately, such obscene procedures are not limited to the beginning of each term. They must be repeated day by day or as often as necessary for the president to remain with a permanent majority, at every passing of any important bill in the parliament.

Furthermore, when you endow the president with the following three functions, namely,
1. Chief of State,
2. Chief of Government, and
3. Chief of the Administration,
the Brazilian model provides a very inconvenient concentration of powers, which allows the complete ENTRYISM (or entrism or enterism) of a political party into the state organization and into the nation’s governmental structure.
Neutrality is an attribute demanded from the State and from its Administration. The Government belongs to a party, not the State, nor the State administration.
Entryism of the Government into the State and its administration will fecundate the womb of corruption.

By Percival Puggina (translated by this humble scribe).

(Translator’s note: that is why state owned companies are like the monstrous mythological Medusa. Companies like the ones that have received any kind of monopoly rights, are extremely deleterious to our economy. Take a look at Petrobras. Brazilians simply cannot organize a strike campaign against the ridiculous prices of fuels, because Petrobras is the only supplier of petroleum to our country. We cannot reject its products and prices because we do not have any other supplier.

If all state owned companies were given away to the Brazilian people, we would be much better off. Of course, before that, new electoral legislation would have to be approved in order to prevent illiterate persons to participate in any election, whatsoever.

Unfortunately, as a very wise friend of mine puts it, more ignorant than the absolutely inexperienced politicians that Brazilians have already elected (like Tiririca and you know who) are the ones who have voted on them without first checking whether they will be able to defend the true interests of our nation or not.

Haven’t we elected a totally inexperienced person to be our next president? Who knows? Maybe, in his simplicity, Tiririca may point to the Brazilian people that the King is naked, or even better than that, that the Queen doesn’t have any clothes on.

In respect to both the present and the future presidents of Brazil, all I can say is an equivalent to that old Brazilian proverb: TOO MUCH, TOO SOON (quem nunca comeu mel, quando como se lambuza).

Brazilians must remember that they have not elected the squid to be the president in a parliamentary state, where the function of the president is to represent his country before the world, and not to govern the nation (function of the Prime Minister). I repeat, the squid was not elected to be a globetrotter. He was elected to be our president in a presidential system of government, and not in a parliamentary governmental system.

The way things are nowadays, it is extremely difficult to make both ends meet. Our country, today, is the result of all the unacceptable mistakes perpetrated by many of our presidents during the twentieth century.

Why is it so? The answer is very easy: because our people still dream of turning Brazil into the new version of the long ago buried Empire of the Soviet Socialist Republics. And, unfortunately, the state of Rio Grande do Sul is one of the leaders of such movement.

God, have mercy on us.
In the global scenario, only the best will survive and it doesn’t seem to me that Brazil is among the best, due mostly to our leftist political parties whose leaders are unable to see beyond the tip of their noses.
One final question: If National Socialism (Nazism) is anathema, how come Marxist Socialism and Communism and, last but not least, Anarchism have not become anathemas yet?

If you know, send me an e-mail.

Dixi.