INTRODUCTION
The 2018 Brazilian presidential elections were characterised by political and electoral polarisation built from the ideological precepts bolstered by the Workers’ Party (Partido do Trabalhador – PT) and the Social Liberal Party (Partido Social Liberal – PSL). The antagonistic evidence in the relationship around these two political parties was constituted by the speeches of the main subjects (candidates Fernando Haddad and Jair Bolsonaro, respectively) and were built from their discursive formations following two opposing lines of thought.
Bolsonaro appeared as an alternative to the Workers’ Party (henceforth denominated as PT), which had been in power since President Lula’s election in 2003. The years leading up to 2018 were characterised by corruption scandals, the impeachment of President Dilma Rousseff (2016), economic downfall, and an increase in criminality (Layton et al. 2021). Thus, it is possible to say that the Brazilian political landscape, at the time of the 2018 elections, was propitious to feelings of revolt, exasperation, and the demand for change.
Drawing from those circumstances, Bolsonaro came forth and promised the people that his government would solve the problem of criminality, whose source was, according to him, none other than the government of PT. By assuring the people that he would put an end to PT’s “ideological grip” on the country, Bolsonaro stood as the candidate who would finally make Brazil safe.
EASY SOLUTION
A method through which Bolsonaro took advantage of criminality as a wicked problem (Selg 2020) is by communicating ‘easy solutions’ to Brazilians by means of emotive and phatic communication styles (ibid.). It seems that people can be coaxed into accepting ‘absurd’ solutions to the wicked problem of criminality, as contextualised by one of Bolsonaro’s quotes, stated during his campaign in the South of Brazil (Hupsel Filho 2018):
”It is inherent to the human being to carry a weapon. If someone is armed, I have to be too. We have to be on the same level. If a guy two metres tall comes to attack me, how will I, a short guy, defend myself?” [1](Curitiba city, Santa Catarina state, March 28th, 2018).
The characteristics of wicked problems comprise two different sets. On the one hand, they give information about the problem, i.e. that wicked problems are especially difficult to define and to narrow down (Selg 2020). In this way, the problem of criminality is difficult to pinpoint, as there are hundreds of different problems that can merge under this umbrella term, including everything from cyberattacks to homicides – as long as they are characterised as something against the law. As the problem of criminality is unclear, it can be anything that Bolsonaro sees as effective for his purposes. In the case of the above quote, it is implied that it should be criminal that somebody who is two metres tall can attack you while you, being physically smaller, are not able to defend yourself. The mere threat of a potential enemy seems to be enough and that the only envisioned way forward is to acquire a weapon.
Communication styles such as this feed on the emotions and fears of its listeners. The audience can thus identify itself with these forms, as public appeals to stereotypes, common situations and stories are used to fortify the connection of symbolic messages and its listeners. Here, such a narrative is built that there is only one inherent solution, when actually other solutions could be more justified.
This brings us to the actual solution and the second set of characteristics of wicked problems. The solution to a wicked problem is not easily apparent and there might be repercussions for trying out different solutions (Selg 2020). In Bolsonaro’s quote above, we see that Bolsonaro advocates that there is an easy/only solution, i.e. just carry a weapon. In this way, you can defend yourself, no matter who comes up against you.
What Bolsonaro is actually doing however, is deproblematizing a wicked problem and possible policy interventions against it, deflecting this as a person’s individual responsibility of self-defence instead as that of the state and judicial bodies. This works because people have become frustrated with the current state of corruption and are hungry for change and justice, which Bolsonaro’s party manifesto offers (Burst et al. 2020). In this way, people would rather take this form of ‘illusioned empowerment’ – which comes packaged in very emotive language – than continuing with the current status quo.
COMPLEX EVALUABILITY
As a wicked problem, criminality is hard to define, thus it would be difficult to measure how much Bolsonaro’s government led to its decrease. Firstly, it is challenging to account for all variables which may or may not influence the criminality rate in Brazil. This is because by the ‘virtue of its wickedness’, criminality can be a sign of other problems (Selg 2020). Crime rate may be in causal relations with, for instance, the economy (UNODC 2012). At the same time, short-term results of interventions for decreasing criminality are mostly not conclusive and sometimes misleading. As such, the Pernabuco Program in Brazil invested in the decrease of homicides by 33% (Chainey 2019, §12). However, after 2015, its effectiveness fell down and the homicide rate reached its highest level in 2017 (ibid). This is to illustrate that solutions to criminality cannot be easily evaluated in a short-term perspective. Moreover, any solution to criminality has an irreversible effect, since human lives are at stake. All these features put criminality in the category of wicked problems (Selg 2020).
Furthermore, criminality is not restricted to just homicides. As noted previously, criminality is an umbrella term. In case of authoritarian populism (Selg 2020), the latter may open possibilities for a policy maker to focus only on the component of a given problem, which favours their position. When employing such a reductionist approach, Bolsonaro may argue that the rate of violent deaths, for instance, has decreased in Brazil (Lisboa 2019). An illustrative example of this is Bolsonaro’s speech at the UN General Assembly meeting in 2019, when he mentioned the 20% decrease in homicides (Verdélio 2019, § 9).
The latter may be used to support his pre-electoral promise illustrated in the party manifesto and his speeches. It is worth mentioning that, although the violent deaths rate has been decreasing since 2017 (Lisboa 2019), the power of organized criminal groups has increased (Berg and Varsori 2020).
To sum up, criminality as a wicked problem requires complex logical models for statistical analysis. However, even the latter is possible only when narrowing down criminality to one of its components. Therefore, there is an open room for a reductionist approach, which according to Selg (2020) is peculiar to authoritarian populism, as well as data manipulation for the sake of gaining public support.
ANTI-PT
During his electoral campaign in the North of Brazil, on September 3rd, 2018, Bolsonaro stood on top of a sound truck and bellowed, while holding a rifle (Ribeiro 2018):
”We’re going to shoot PT-voters. I’m going to chase them away from our country.” [2] (Rio Branco city, Acre state, September 3, 2018).
It is worth noting that, by saying that he is going to shoot the people who vote for PT, Bolsonaro is implying that he is making the country safer. That is because, for Bolsonaro and his supporters, PT has been established as the source of all criminality. In this sense, the phrase above is not just a threat to all PT affiliates, it implies that they are the common (internal) enemy, and thus, PT becomes a signifier of criminality. As far as a solution for the problem of criminality, shooting people whose ideology differs from Bolsonaro’s is not a solution that can be understood as true or false. It is, instead, either good or bad, which once again allows us to characterise criminality as a wicked problem (Selg 2020).
On another instance, one can recognize traces of totalitarian populism in this quote. Bolsonaro exacerbates the antagonism between ‘us’ vs. ‘them’, meaning him and his supporters vs. PT and theirs. According to Selg (2020), totalitarianism has an intrinsic paradox, which can be exemplified through this quote. There is a clear social division: people who are ‘for-PT’ and people who are ‘against-PT’, which is to say ‘for-Bolsonaro’. However, this social division is seen as a problem. The ‘others’ must be chased away, they must leave the country, or otherwise be shot, in order for there to be no division.
Bolsonaro actively condemns all ideologies that are different from his own. Under this idea of homogenization of the way of thinking, lies the difference: ‘for-Bolsonaro’ vs. ‘for-PT’, friend vs. enemy (Schmidt 1932).
Hence, Bolsonaro needs PT as a reference point because it is the hate towards PT that totalized the people under his banner. PT had been in power for two decades and, after many political scandals (Layton et al. 2021), hate towards PT was preeminent. In this respect, one can identify here Laclau’s (1996) empty signifier. Along with this hate, the people were left with a ‘lack’: after so many years voting for PT, now that this party was no longer an option, the people were left with a feeling of ‘what else is left?’. And then comes Bolsonaro, representing the anti-PT, thus fulfilling this lack.
In summary, Bolsonaro needs PT to totalize his own supporters, and yet he promises to eliminate PT, because the party in question is the signifier of criminality. Bolsonaro relies on this division (us/them, friend/enemy), which is a division he is, in this quote, promising to get rid of.
CONCLUSIONS
I argued that Bolsonaro took advantage of the wicked problem of criminality to obtain public approval. Three motions or methods on how Bolsonaro was able to take characteristics of wicked problems and use them for his own political agenda are highlighted:
First, championing a seemingly ‘easy solution’ to pacify and give Brazilians a form of ‘illusioned empowerment’ against a wicked problem. Second, taking advantage of the immeasurability of the umbrella term ‘criminality’ for purposes of data selectiveness or manipulation. And third, benefitting from the good or bad evaluation around criminality, by branding the opposition, the Workers’ Party (PT), as a signifier for criminality, as something bad, and using this to totalize Brazilians against PT under his banner.
With these findings I want to showcase how utterances of authoritarian and totalitarian origins – phatic and emotive communications – can be dangerously effective when connected with wicked problems.
Understanding the limitations of wicked problems helps us to re-evaluate political promises, especially when these seem to contain empty words for the purpose of gaining public approval and power.
References
Burst, Tobias / Krause, Werner / Lehmann, Pola / Matthieß Theres / Merz, Nicolas / Regel, Sven / Weßels, Bernhard / Zehnter, Lisa (2020): The Manifesto Data Collection: South America. Version 2020b. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB). https://doi.org/10.25522/manifesto.mpdssa.2020b
Chainey, S., Muggah, R., & Giannini, R. A. (2019). Reducing Homicide in Brazil: Insights Into What Works. Americas Quarterly.Retrived from https://www.americasquarterly.org/article/reducing-homicide-in-brazil-insights-into-what-works/, 04.12.2021
Hupsel Filho, V. (2018, March 29). “Arma é garantia de nossa liberdade”, defende Bolsonaro em Curitiba. Estadão. Retrieved from https://politica.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral,arma-e-garantia-de-nossa-liberdade-defende-bolsonaro-em-curitiba,70002247541, 06.12.2021
Laclau, E., 1996a. Why do empty signifiers matter to politics?. In: E. Laclau, ed. Emancipation(s). London: Verso, 34–46.
Layton ML, Smith AE, Moseley MW, Cohen MJ. Demographic polarization and the rise of the far right: Brazil’s 2018 presidential election. Research & Politics. January 2021. doi:10.1177/2053168021990204
Ribeiro, J. (2018, September 3). “Vamos fuzilar a petralhada”, diz Bolsonaro em campanha no Acre. Exame. Retrieved from https://exame.com/brasil/vamos-fuzilar-a-petralhada-diz-bolsonaro-em-campanha-no-acre/, 06.12.2021
Schmitt, C. (1932). The concept of the political: Expanded edition. University of Chicago Press.
Selg, Peeter. (2020). A political-semiotic Explanation of wicked problems. Forthcoming In: Elżbieta Hałas, Nicolas Maslowski (Ed.). Politics of Symbolization Across Central and Eastern Europe. Berlin: Peter Lang.
United Nations. Office on Drugs and Criminality (2012).Economic crisis may trigger rise in crime. Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/frontpage/2012/February/economic-crises-can-trigger-rise-in-crime.html, 25.11.2021
Verdélio Andreia (2019).In UN speech, Bolsonaro talks about socialism and religion.The president criticized Cuba, Venezuela, and religious intolerance. Agência Brasil. Retrived from https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/politica/noticia/2019-09/un-speech-bolsonaro-talks-about-socialism-and-religion, 06.12.2021
[1] Originally: “É inerente do ser humano andar armado. Se alguém está armado eu tenho que estar também. Tem que nivelar. Se vier um cara de dois metros de altura me atacar, eu, que sou baixinho, vou me defender como?” (Hupsel Filho 2018). Translation by Heidi Campana Piva.
[2] Originally: “Vamos fuzilar a petralhada. Eu vou botar esses picaretas para correr do nosso país.”
(Ribeiro 2018). Translation by Heidi Campana Piva.