#WORLD #WORLDWIDE #BRAZIL #ANARCHISM #News #Journal #Update - (en) #Brazil, CAB:[FARPA-AL]Now they want to talk about fighting hunger (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 From electoral debates to government programs, the fight against hunger, poverty

and misery has been heard repeatedly in the pulpits and platforms of candidates
for the Government of Alagoas. Mixed between the nitpicking and performances of
the opponents among themselves, these opponents of the people are unconvincing.
---- Data that used to go unnoticed today are conveniently used to demonstrate
the harsh reality of a state that, in fact, grows in conditions of hunger,
illiteracy, the absolute lack of prospects for work and sustenance. What they
point out as a solution: tax exemption and business development, or palliative
measures (urgently necessary but, alone, insufficient) of aid grants. They put
the fight against hunger as propaganda, while ignoring the complexity and how
their own decisions - within the personal political history of their allies,
parties, and coalitions - even ACCENTATED the hunger situation.

Where does Paulo Dantas' trajectory show that he intends to fight poverty? He
arrived "at the last minute" taking over the government of Renan Filho (MDB), of
which he was deputy, and tried to hurriedly release various measures aimed at
elections. However, if your demarcation is the story of the former governor and
son of Renan Calheiros, let him also bear the burden: it is not possible to
forget how much FECOEP was tied up and used in a dispersed way, leaving those who
need it most in fact in a helplessness situation - and we are talking about a
fund that had more than R$ 800 million!

Where does the trajectory of Fernando Collor de Mello (PROS) point towards
someone who really wants to think about those who need it most? He who is the
flag bearer of Bolsonarism and anti-people measures, who defaulted on savings and
today defaults to his company's former workers. He also voted in favor of the
so-called "secret budget", which allocates funds to the Budget through the
rapporteur's amendments. In addition to voting for what would be a new labor
reform in order to make life even more difficult for young workers, who could be
hired without the right to vacation, 13th, FGTS and other labor rights. If the
measure had been approved, it would have made it even more difficult to inspect
slave-like labor, increase the working hours of miners, reduce overtime payments,
etc.

Where did Rodrigo Cunha's (PSDB) trajectory demonstrate legitimate social
interest, when he voted in favor of the Social Security Reform, the PEC dos
Precatórios that will manage R$ 100 billion of the Precatórios for Auxílio
Brasil, in an electoral dynamic that handles the Ceiling of Spending, but not a
penny among the richest. In fact, Cunha, who preaches transparency so much, also
voted in favor of the Secret Budget.

 From Rui Palmeira, the story comes from here in Maceió and we don't forget that
it was his management who built a cost containment plan that intended to mortify
the retirement of municipal servants and other attacks on the civil service. It
was he who consummated the extinction of the Vila dos Pescadores de Jaraguá,
bringing absurd impacts felt until today by the traditional fishing community
that today struggles for sustenance, still facing illness, deaths, to benefit
economic segments with the deepening of the process of segregation, hygiene and
racism. environmental.

Speaking of housing, we extend to environmental issues, where the silence is
brutal on the part of ALL OF THEM regarding the impacts of criminal mining
committed by BRASKEM, which today slip much more than in the five neighborhoods
directly affected. In the eviction and absurd impunity of a company that, in the
end, will WIN with all the destruction caused against the people.

Fighting selective hunger? How is this possible? Contributing with everything
that strengthens the insecurity of life, housing, security, health, education and
obviously food of the people? Nothing new and so deserving of the criticism made
in the 1920s by Maria Lacerda de Moura: "It is not a question of smearing the
cause of the bloody wound of misery, even at the heart of opulence, alongside
idleness that cynically enjoys itself after throw a few nickels at the starving,
nickels stolen from the hard work of the exploited of wages. There is only the
concern of throwing a crumb into the gaping mouth of hunger, perhaps to be left
in peace... And having fun at the expense of pain, bitterness, hunger, is to
insult suffering".

It is the trap of charity that limits itself to uprooting the dignity of the
people and demobilizing them, as she adds: "It is when we come to the conclusion
that charity humiliates, depreciates, devirilizes; it defies the one who gives
and the one who receives; when we feel that the solution to human problems is not
charity that suffocates all the inner fibers from which, from the gaping faces of
misery and leftovers, the superfluous; the charity that strangles all the latent
energies of those who stretch out their hands to slavishly receive what is left
of the orgies and exploitation of those who live at the expense of other people's
work; when, by itself, the morality on which the prevailing society feeds decrees
the bankruptcy, that odious morality, of the pious rich and the poor classes
receiving alms, of charitable and exploited exploiters calculatedly guarded by
the armed force, which maintains external passivity. .

It is not a matter of just pointing out the history one by one, to discredit the
intentionality of the fight against hunger.
Here we denounce the hypocrisy of speeches that do not match the practice, while
we understand that even the best-intentioned with a coherent posture, and who
even denounce this type of practice, by placing themselves in this place of
candidacy in Alagoas, dispute a a place that - within the political trick of the
representative regime - will be able to accomplish little for the good of the
people, in fact, it will be able to do almost nothing for it alone to "bring the
people to power". Not within this institutional framework, since the construction
of popular power will not come from the top down.

To those who still realized: there was no woman, and even if there were, we still
remember when Lacerda de Moura notes how much "that these claims cannot be
limited to charitable action or a simple right to vote that does not come, any
way to resolve the question of human happiness and will be restricted to a very
limited number of women." Her context in keeping with the time was critical of
the misrepresentations of feminism interpreted through suffragist eyes, but it is
what she says about the fight against misery that touches us so much.

It is necessary to be very, very careful, with the traps posed by the charitable
takeover of the electoral process. It is still worth how much "we owe to
governmental superstition, to sectarian religious superstition, to patriotic
superstition, to nationalist superstition, to the superstition of material
progress, to the greed of the few and the servility of the majority - the
predominance of this civilization of two social classes: the of the rich and the
poor. Humanity will find it difficult to understand that social life could unfold
in an environment of solidarity, of mutual assistance, without masters or slaves,
without protectors and protégés, without parliamentary representations in
graduated mediocracies".

It may cost, Maria, but the day will come.

MUTUAL SUPPORT AND SELF-MANAGEMENT: WITHOUT PEACE AND CHOICE FOR THE RICH
And that is why this conversation is not one of hopelessness. As Malatesta puts
it, "we are not simply a negative force, but we want to be and we are an active,
operative, effective force in the struggle for emancipation". It is with him that
we also know how much "the isolated, occasional propaganda, which is often done
with the aim of calming your conscience, or simply to give free rein to your
passion for discussion, this propaganda is for nothing or next to nothing. It is
forgotten, it is lost before its effects can be added to one another and become
fruitful, in view of the conditions of unconsciousness and misery of the masses
and, on the other hand, all the forces that are against us. "

It's not just hopelessness in voting or criticism of charity: What we understand
is just that the path of hope in a better world is not that way. And as many
times as necessary, we bet that, instead of representation by a State that
decides from the top down, only in the organization of those below that we can
face and enforce our rights and, above all, actually fight hunger by reaching its
causes, taking care of what is emergency on its own, building a future in which
it has no more ground to exist.

The rich will not return in peace what they took from us. They won't return it on
the platforms or when they come down from it in their offices. Will not return.
The trap of charity that buys votes is well aware of this and therefore needs
hunger to exist. It is this charity that confronts everything we bet on: an
emancipated, libertarian society that takes root while taking care of emergencies
through mutual support. It is this mutual help that shows solidarity while
building a new reality shoulder to shoulder. The campaign to combat hunger that
we invite is, therefore, an opposite and concrete path. It does not involve
choosing candidates, but choosing people, social movements, neighborhoods,
schools, unions, to build solutions collectively.

Want to know more about our CAMPAIGN?

https://cabanarquista.org/2022/09/05/farpa-al-agora-querem-falar-de-combate-a-fome/
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca