Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Brazil's political situation

Options
  • 31-03-2021 3:57pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,464 ✭✭✭


    Anyone understand what is going on over there now?

    The 3 heads of the Armed forced seem to have resigned in unison.

    Will Bolsonaro just replace them with lackeys or is this trouble for him?


Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,980 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    Apparently the new Defence Minister told them that their loyalty should be to the President and not to the Constitution. They disagreed and walked. Given that Bolsanoro has never hid his admiration for the military dictatorship of the past it is worrying times for democracy in Brazil.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,464 ✭✭✭amandstu


    Apparently the new Defence Minister told them that their loyalty should be to the President and not to the Constitution. They disagreed and walked. Given that Bolsanoro has never hid his admiration for the military dictatorship of the past it is worrying times for democracy in Brazil.
    Seems this "loyalty to the leader" is a contagious concept

    Trump is quite an aficionado ,but I doubt if this loyalty extends to President Biden.

    I wonder where the loyalty of the Brazilian Armed Forces lies after these resignations.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,338 ✭✭✭Bit cynical


    In Ireland, the supreme commander of the armed forces is the president, currently Michael D. Higgins. Personally I prefer that that is the case rather than the military being loyal to their interpretation of the Constitution.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,281 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    In Ireland, the supreme commander of the armed forces is the president, currently Michael D. Higgins. Personally I prefer that that is the case rather than the military being loyal to their interpretation of the Constitution.

    You're going to be a bit disappointed then. The oath of commission for Irish officers is laid out in the Defence Forces Act, 1937.

    " I _______ do solemnly swear (or declare) that I will be faithful to Ireland and loyal to the Constitution and that while I am an officer in Oglaigh na h-Eireann I will obey all orders issued to me by my superior officers according to law and I will not join or be a member of or subscribe to any organisation without due permission."


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,318 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Likewise in the US. The President is the Commander in Chief; the oath provides that:

    "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

    The President of Brazil is also the Commander in Chief of the Brazilian armed forces. That wasn't, apparently, enough for Bolsenaro.

    The command structure of an army, and the question of where its loyalty lies, are two different things. Military commanders — even the commander in chief — are due obedience, not loyalty or allegiance.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,980 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    This happened earlier this month:
    Brazil’s former president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva could be set for a sensational comeback attempt after a supreme court judge annulled a series of criminal convictions against the leftist icon and restored his political rights.

    The ruling, which analysts called a political bombshell, means Lula is almost certain to challenge Brazil’s incumbent president, Jair Bolsonaro, in the 2022 presidential election.

    “The election starts today … It’s virtually impossible Lula won’t be a candidate,” said Thomas Traumann, a Rio de Janeiro-based political observer. “In American terms, it’s going to be like Sanders versus Trump.”

    The Valor Econômico, Brazil’s leading financial newspaper, declared: “Lula is back in the game.”

    It wouldn't take too much of a cynic to come to the conclusion that these stories are related.

    Worst case scenario, Bolsanor is worried about Lula beating him in the election at the end of next year and is making sure that the military are on his side should he need to maintain control the old fashioned way.

    link


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 21,059 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    amandstu wrote: »
    Seems this "loyalty to the leader" is a contagious concept

    Trump is quite an aficionado ,but I doubt if this loyalty extends to President Biden.

    I wonder where the loyalty of the Brazilian Armed Forces lies after these resignations.

    It's worrying in one way, Brazil has a long history with military dictatorship. A coup led by the guys who just resigned isn't as far fetched a possibility as it would be in most countries.

    It would be a mistake as well as morally wrong,.obviously.

    Right now, Bolsanaro is dead man walking. He absolutely wouldn't win an election if it was held this year. He has another 18 months to go though. Don't underestimate the power he has to sway people with his wannabe hard man act. If he gets his act together he can be a political force again come the next election.

    The man is a horror show though. Ignoring covid is just his latest crime against the Brazilian population.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,403 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    In Ireland, the supreme commander of the armed forces is the president, currently Michael D. Higgins. Personally I prefer that that is the case rather than the military being loyal to their interpretation of the Constitution.

    I prefer a system that relies on the collective interpretation of a bunch of people than the orders of one person that might turn out to be completely unhinged.
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    The command structure of an army, and the question of where its loyalty lies, are two different things. Military commanders — even the commander in chief — are due obedience, not loyalty or allegiance.
    There needs to be an exception for unlawful orders, that's where obedience ends and loyalty matters.


Advertisement