Javer Milei’s figure has an impact on the Brazilian public. For some, it’s a reflection of what they want, and for others, it’s criticism and distancing from different manifestations. For many, he is the character Brazil needs to cut public spending (especially on advertising). In the view of some, he represents the outsider capable of curbing unnecessary spending in politics, a discourse that has a lot of support in sectors that support liberal policies in Brazil.
This perception gains ground in the anti-political current that gained impulse in Brazil after Bolsonaro’s election in 2018. “O Brasil Dobrou a Direita”, by Jairo Nicolau, is a fundamental book for understanding the phenomenon of Bolsonarism in 2018. It reveals a diagnosis of the profile of his original voters: male, evangelical, urban, multiclass. Who had as their narrative the fight against corruption and the search for public security.
In this context, Plaza Pública evaluated the figure of Milei and part of his narrative. A way of understanding how this phenomenon has an impact on Brazilian society. To set up a kind of mirror to examine the lights and shadows, to test the extent to which this discourse has an impact on Brazilians. To detect how it dialogues with the space that Bolsonarism has carved out.
Plaza Publica used 8 phrases by Javier Milei as a stimulus, to assess adherence/rejection/nuances, as well as different “cards/emoticons” with minimalist designs, to assess associated emotions.
Six insighst revealed:
- Dichotomic perception. He is valued for the economic changes he is promoting, for the idea of cutting political spending (“It’s something we rarely see in politics. They usually want to increase public spending, right? That caught my attention”). At the same time, his controversial profile raises doubts. Remembrance of the cryptocurrency scandal is low. Those who do remember it, see it as an example of an “opportunist, someone who took advantage of a blank space and created a character”.
- Motoserrinha. Cuts in the public machine, in the Brazilian way. There is disagreement with massive, discretionary cuts in public spending, without evaluating them on a case-by-case basis. Cuts in public propaganda are valued, and it is necessary to assess which ones should or can be made. There is a certain resentment/distrust that these cuts cannot be made. “You’re not going to build a nursery school…?” ‘What do you mean there’s a bridge in the way because you’re suspending public works…?’ ”This image of the chainsaw is so extreme. We’re going to cut, we’re going to hack. It promises a lot, it promises a bomb. But in reality it’s a firecracker… I think it’s a bit fanciful to be able to do that….”
- Milei’s radicalized agenda has limits: a tropicalized reception. There are boundaries to Milei’s discourse in Brazil. LGBTQ+ rights and feminism are causes defended in Brazil, acquired rights that the people of São Paulo and Rio do not want to change or go back on. However, a problem arises for many, that this defense of legitimate rights has “crossed the line”, in some cases turning into an imposition. There is a veiled criticism of a politically correct discourse that has become established in many areas, which Bolsonarism attacks with a prejudiced spirit, but which manages to permeate various strata as something to be thought about, to be nuanced. “Feminism’s quest for equality is necessary. We see the pay gap that exists with women…” “Women seek a position of equality…” When stimulated by a phrase from Javier Milei’s Minister of Justice, Cuneo Libarona, evaluated as a way of testing the extreme of this thinking. “I repudiate the diversity of sexual identities that do not align with biology…”. The negative reactions are eloquent and show the limits of this discourse in Brazilian society. The idea of respect prevails, as it is not only an extreme phrase, but one that borders on the malicious, breaking the barrier of what is acceptable in Brazil. “Ridiculous, a sentence with no meaning at all… Everyone has to be respected, regardless of their sexual orientation…” “I’m laughing to keep from crying. That sentence is despicable…” “That sentence is criminal, I don’t agree….”
- However, the idea of charging non-resident foreigners for the use of public services is controversial. On the one hand, it triggers feelings of wanting to order a situation that, supposedly, they currently have no control over. On the other hand, Brazilians in other parts of the world experience limitations in the use of free public services, especially in the United States. A kind of reciprocity is sought in this sense. However, there are many who question the root of this idea, motivated both by humanitarian empathy and by the understanding that the country needs tourists, who generate resources, pay taxes and, from there, should be able to enjoy public services.
“Foreigners come here, they do what they want, they enjoy it” ”You see other places. That’s not how it works…” “Everyone is a human being. But I think it should be charged, right? Here people come and do what they want in this country… in other countries it’s not like that. In the United States there’s no public hospital, you have to pay.” “I totally disagree with that sentence, because just as he’s in our country consuming and paying taxes too….”
- The so-called “gender ideology” has been widely consolidated as an issue to be combated Bolsonarism has created conditions and established a widespread idea in Brazil: that the debate on sex education in schools is harmful, that it leads to excesses and, in a more extreme version, that it is a matter for the private sphere of families. This contrasts with official statistics which indicate that most child abuse takes place in the family environment. Again, in contrast to a limiting phrase (“in its extreme version, gender ideology constitutes child abuse”), Brazilians reject this link. Not the root of the idea that gender ideology is harmful, but the extreme of associating it with child abuse.
“I think it’s very invasive to expose children’s genitals in books, for example…” “Children have to be children, you know? Everything has its time to be learned….” ”Linking sex education to child abuse is extremely blatant to me…..”
- Milei is not indifferent. He generates mixed and visceral emotions. Stimulated by a series of “cards”, with positive and negative emoticons (8 of each), positive emotions arise associated with the changes he is making. The weight he is carrying because of the situation the country is in. And an intrinsic affective flow, which moves the negative passions, from “crazy”, “clown” to “unpredictable”. There are two axes that guide the affective bond: a) Changes/Evolving/Determined/Motivated/Overcoming a heavy burden (images of those who are climbing). “Making the general change there….” ”It may be that he goes higher, evolves much more.” “It means he’s going up, along with the country.” “On the road to improvement.”
b) Clown/Crazy/Confused/impredictable (images of a person confused/spinning on their axis)
“scarecrow/clown…” “a crazy person… this guy just talks garbage, is he crazy?… You’ll see that his face is that of a crazy person, he’s very crazy…” “the first word that comes to mind is confused…. one moment he says one thing, the next he says another, everything is uncertain…”
Conclusions/Implications
- There is a proximity between the public analyzed and economic positions in general.
- There is a clear decoherence and a local component: they need to be carried out in a more discussed, agreed, dialogued way. A more tropicalized, more friendly spirit.
- The Brazilian political right is orphaned of a natural candidate. With Bolsonaro prevented from being a candidate, there is a clear space of the electorate that supports his ideas, but there is no one to inherit and capture this current. Among those who voted for Bolsonaro in 2022 and are now undecided, a variant “a la Milei” seems attractive. He represents a good part of what they think, economically, politically and culturally.
- The affections generated by Milei consolidate the above. His determination and effort to make changes are valued. His extreme positions, his almost “clownish” style for many of the participants, are a source of reluctance.
- The political climate in Brazil is not one of attack, of emphasizing the “split”. Despite the fact that many participants can’t get out of this polarizing picture, they prefer to placate, to overcome this moment. Milei, as a visceral figure, represents the consolidation of this polarization rather than the possibility of resolving it.
* Plaza Pública is an initiative of Eduardo Sincofsky and Paulo Cidade: a project that takes a longitudinal pulse on various indicators of Public Opinion and Agenda in Brazil.