On March 11, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the pandemic situation of the new coronavirus, called Sars-Cov-2, which causes the Covid-19 disease.
A decision like this is, as we understand, the result of a process of enormous scientific, social and political consideration, as a way to avoid situations of unnecessary panic or alarmism.
Enacting a situation like this depends not only on the number of cases detected and the capacity for contagion, but above all on the level of geographic spread of the virus, which in the present case is, as is well known, impressive at all levels.
The WHO announcement essentially serves as a warning for all countries, without exception, to activate emergency plans to respond to the problem, diagnose suspected cases, isolate and treat infected patients, and prevent the spread, reducing transmission cycles as much as possible. of the virus.
All these measures are aimed at containing Sars-Cov-2 and halting the spread of the pandemic, thus avoiding the burden on health systems, so that they can maintain control of the situation. Adopting all the preventive and containment measures available to the States, in the shortest period of time, is crucial to defending human life, maintaining health responses with good levels of action and reducing the negative impacts on employment and the economy.
There is, as is understood, an individual responsibility in all of this, as the behavior of each person is a determining variable in preventing contagion, and the attitudes that we must all adopt in the current context have been widely publicized.
Faced with such an adverse situation, Heads of State across the planet have been taking unprecedented measures, many of them unpopular, with the aim of saving lives, protecting health systems and reducing as much as possible the negative impacts on employment and health. economy.
There are no perfect recipes or single paths to solve this problem, but there is a general consensus, even among the most hostile political leaders, on the need to reorganize society in the shortest possible time, leaving a good part of the society to social confinement. population and keeping in operation only the services essential to human survival in the current context of the pandemic.
From what has been observed all over the world, life is at this time the most precious asset and its safeguard takes precedence over the defense of the economy. As we well know, this was not always the case.
And in Brazil, how has Jair Bolsonaro behaved in managing this crisis? There are countless adjectives that come to me to classify his performance and his person, and unfortunately I can't find one that is supportive. The first conclusion to be drawn is related to his unpreparedness to hold the office of President of the Republic.
In reality, this observation is old, although now the evidence is more expressive, even for many of those who trusted him and cast their vote in him in the last elections.
Bolsonaro's appeals to the population to leave home and continue working, as well as the guidelines to keep airports, schools and many other institutions functioning normally, contradict WHO indications, the actions of many Heads of State and measures and recommendations of other members of the Brazilian Government.
The statement to the country and the repeated public statements that minimize the risks related to Covid-19 are a reflection of its ignorance and its total irresponsibility. Bolsonaro denies the scientific evidence and proven data from numerous countries affected by the pandemic, in an attitude of total blindness, making frequent contradictory and incendiary statements.
To the health crisis that the country is going through, the still President of the Republic of Brazil added a political and institutional crisis, by opening a completely unnecessary "war" with governors, mayors and members of his own government, who in a responsible attitude try to stop the expansion of the new coronavirus.
The Covid-19 pandemic has served as another argument for Bolsonaro to continue his accusations against the democratic opposition and the Brazilian media. He blames them for fostering a climate of hysteria, making statements that are at least unbelievable for a President of the Republic, such as those arguing that Brazilians should be educated, because "the guy jumps in sewers, goes out, dives and doesn't catch anything", or “worse than the coronavirus is the mediavirus”.
Such statements are irresponsible and dangerous because they incite the youngest and healthiest people to disrespect social distance and confinement, putting the lives of thousands of people at risk.
Bolsonaro did not know the country he presides over, as he has ignored the deficiencies of the health system, as well as the situations of poverty and unhealthy conditions that affect a good part of the population. These pose very serious threats to the worsening epidemic in Latin America's largest nation.
Aware of the countless difficulties of the Brazilian people who depend on their work, this is, however, the time to privilege life, even if with negative impacts on the economy. Life is a greater and irretrievable good after being lost, while the economy has always lived through cycles of growth and crisis.
The Brazilian President has repeatedly demonstrated his disrespect for the population by delivering a death speech, devaluing the loss of “some” human lives as something necessary to save the economy. It is wrong to think that only the elderly can succumb to this disease, but even if it did, it could never be a lesser evil for a Head of State. Bolsonaro's attitude represents the moral bankruptcy of politics and the position he holds.
What is at stake is not the survival of his tenure, as some say. This one in practice is already over! Bolsonaro is disallowed for his incendiary and criminal conduct. The self is currently a threat to public health.
With his attitude, Bolsonaro encourages the spread of the virus and counteracts the efforts of the entire planet. His responsibility for this matter thus goes beyond Brazilian borders, as it is well known that the disease must be stopped at all latitudes, as a way to prevent the emergence of new outbreaks and the uncontrolled spread of the virus.
Internationally, Bolsonaro has once again revealed his double facet. On the one hand, it maintains its diplomatic incapacity in relations with numerous countries, as it did this time with the preferred statements about Italy. On the other hand, it behaves like a domesticated being that obeys the orders of its owner, in this case Donald Trump, functioning as an echo or sounding board for all the enormities uttered by the leader of the White House.
Brazil needs serious leadership, lucid, responsible and committed to life. Bolsonaro is the denial of all this. This one prefers attack to conciliation; privileges conflict over consensus; favors ignorance at the expense of science; turns democratic opponents into enemies of war; accentuates accusations by avoiding dialogue; he prefers social division, knowing that it hurts national unity.
Brazil cannot accept a President who behaves in this way. His actions are reprehensible, and it is perfectly justifiable to try Bolsonaro for a crime against humanity.
Not only did he avoid defending social isolation, as a measure to stop the widespread contagion of his people, as he called on Brazilians to continue working, calling those who stay at home “cowards”. In one of his many surreal statements, the Brazilian President defended that “the medicine for the virus is work”.
This stance, largely supported by evidence, describes a deliberate and repeated act of the President of the Republic against his people, especially the most fragile and defenseless, pressing them to face a risk of life without the means of self-defence.
It is a State crime, as it is committed by the Head of Government himself, in a period of peace, subjecting its population to a process of human experimentation, with a view to achieving a possible but unproven community immunity, without scientific means that support this thesis and assume that the death of “some” is something necessary.
Brazil Cannot Accept!
Author Nelson Dias is a sociologist and consultant at the World Bank
Comments