DE CHIRICO E A METAFÍSICA DA POLÍTICA BRASILEIRA

Retorno a este país em meio a esta vergonhosa campanha eleitoral da socialdemocracia. Não preciso dizer em quem eu vou votar. Os meus amigos e os meus inimigos já sabem. E eu não pretendo convencer ninguém. O brasil continuará o mesmo dos últimos quinhentos anos: oligarca, patriarcal, semi-medieval, covil de ladrões, degredados, degradados, e desgraçados. Agora, devastado pelo que os marxistas supõem ser uma "luta de classes", coisa que nem o próprio Marx conseguiu definir.
Como sabem aqueles que a Marx leram, o não-sei-porquê famosíssimo "capítulo inacabado", que tem apenas cinco pequenos parágrafos, começa dizendo que há TRÊS grandes classes que fundam o modo de produção capitalista. Comecemos por aí: para Marx são três grandes classes. Para todos os marxistas que vieram depois são apenas duas. No caso brasileiro isso se reduziu ainda mais para uma divisão besta entre ricos e pobres.
Para aqueles que fantasiam definir classes pelas fontes de receita (salário, lucro, renda, etc.), o próprio Guru arrasa com o que talvez seja o melhor dos cinco pequenos parágrafos: 
"Pero desde este punto de vista médicos y funcionarios, por ejemplo, también formarían dos clases, pues pertenecen a dos grupos sociales diferentes, en los cuales los réditos de los miembros de cada uno de ambos fluyen de la misma fuente. Lo mismo valdría para la infinita fragmentación de los intereses y posiciones en que la división del trabajo social desdobla a los obreros como a los capitalistas y terratenientes; a los últimos, por ejemplo, en viticultores, agricultores, dueños de bosques, poseedores de minas y poseedores de pesquerías." (uso a fonte mais rápida, mas vocês podem ler onde quiserem, inclusive nas péssimas traduções brasileiras: http://pendientedemigracion.ucm.es/info/bas/es/marx-eng/capital3/MRXC3852.htm). Daí em diante, o Guru calou a boca.
Se Marx conhecesse a história dos médicos cubanos no Brasil ficaria ainda mais impressionado com a multiplicidade de supostas "classes".
Eu retorno da Argentina, que antes foi um país e que hoje é o rebotalho do bolivarianismo. Lá há, pelo menos bons vinhos e um nível cultural ainda alto e que, infelizmente, cada vez baixa mais. Cheguei aqui com medo que o avião da estatal Aerolíneas Argentinas se despedaçasse no tristemente famoso aeroporto do Galeão, hoje já semi-privatizado pelo Estado socialdemocrata.
Em meio aos sobressaltos do velho avião, vim lendo De Chirico, o pintor. Isto mesmo, Giorgio De Chirico, que poucos conhecem como o criador da escola metafísica e precursor do surrealismo. Um dos maiores pintores de todos os tempos foi também autor de uma extraordinária novela metafísica, pré-surrealista, absolutamente fantástica. De Chirico a escreveu em francês, ele que sendo grego falava e escrevia italiano, e alemão, além, é claro, do francês e do grego. O próprio De Chirico fez, depois, uma tradução "ipsis literis", desta "novela", para o italiano. O texto francês foi escrito em 1929, quando o pintor, escritor, e, porque não dizer, filósofo, já estava sendo destruído pelos críticos por causa de suas últimas pinturas. Ele se divertia, a ponto de fazer pinturas "à maneira" do De Chirico preferido pelos críticos (aqueles dos anos 10 do século vinte). "É isto que vocês querem? Aí vai", dizia.
Só em uma Argentina ainda culta poderia encontrar esta tradução para o espanhol do Hebdómeros, nome do livro e do herói. A capa, linda, é um auto-retrato do autor já feito na fase mal dita.

European cities along Brazilian Coast: Analysis of Public Policies for the Protection of this World Heritage*

Manuel Sanches, Department of Political Science, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, manuelsanches@post.harvard.edu

Abstract

This text analyzes the public policies for the protection of world heritage in the Brazilian coastline. The coastline of Brazil shelters three important historical centers of the World Heritage: the cities of Olinda, Salvador, and San Luis. It also shelters three important areas of the World Natural Heritage: the Atlantic forest reserves at the southeast, the islands of Fernando de Noronha, and the Atol das Rocas, and the Atlantic Forest reserves at the coastline of the area of the discovery. All of the historical centers, and mostly of the cultural patrimony included in the coastal area of the Atlantic forest, result from the direct European cultural influenceAtlantic forest.

The Brazilian coastal management policies are not adequately integrated with other policies. Moreover, the government does not provide the necessary resources to protect this heritage It is still lacking the participation of civil society to guarantee that the subject of the protection of the coastal heritage arrive to the agenda of the political powers in the different municipal, state, and federal administrative levels. The text argues that it is of the European Community interest to protect the World Heritage of the Brazilian coast, the legacy that shows the meaning of the Europe in the construction of the New World. For this protection to be effective it is necessary financial and cultural support to coastal management networks. These networks would necessarily include non-governmental, business, educational, and governmental organizations from Brazil and from Europe.

1        PUBLIC POLICY, WORLD HERITAGE, AND COASTAL CULTURAL HERITAGE

Some authors believe that public policy is everything that governments do or not do, or that it covers action, inaction, decisions, not-decisions, choices or not-choices carried on by governments about possible alternatives, leaving out the non-governmental actions. This understanding stems from a legal concept meaning that governments establish public policies through rules and laws. This understanding applies to the policies of cultural preservation and coastal management. This idea of public policy as government policy - or an absence of government policy - makes explicit, however, that government or state unknowns, avoids, or rejects some other policies.

           

Such other policies, when they are not explicitly prohibited by law, can be implemented - and in most cases they are - by agents (non-governmental or non-state), including the non-governmental organizations of today and of the past: multilateral banks, such as the World Bank, Unesco; diverse NGOs, churches, multinational corporations, etc.. Eventually, even when explicitly prohibited, other institutions beyond the state implement policies to the public interest. This was true in the past and it is true nowadays. In today's world, due to global dynamics, the formation of networks, the internationalization of the public sector, trade and environmental policies, it is clear that the concept of public policies can no longer be restricted to state policies. However, even in the distant past, the churches, commercial organizations and even other states established public policies. Those policies were often antagonistic to the policies which metropolis established for their colonial territories. The policies of the Jesuits in Latin America are examples of a more definitive.

                       

The concept of heritage of humanity, or world heritage, has also been a cause for confrontations of theoretical and political importance. There is an intense discussion about what is right or wrong, belonging to the values of either nation, or of one or another regional culture within a nation. The meanings of the heritage are permanently changed, defined, and negotiated. Usually the legacy is one example of previous dominant cultures, which sometimes have been adapted to local conditions. Representations of these legacies are always consequence of any fight or political, national, religious, or economic domination.

There are cases of conflicts among the local population, the national authority, and international concern, cases where the local population refuses or fails to support the indication for the qualification of world heritage. Usually, these conflicts originate from the idea that there is a loss of sovereignty over the heritage or that the costs with the qualification of world heritage may be greater than the benefits. Some of these conflicts were caused by works, roads, such as in Stonehenge, for excessive tourism, as in Cambridge, England, or by local resistance as in the case of some municipalities of the Dutch Wadden Sea at the beginning of this decade. These cases illustrate the necessity of establishing a concept of world heritage that circumvents international, national, and local conflicts.

For various previous reasons, the concept of world heritage, established in the General Conference of UNESCO in 1972, has evolved continuously. The main instruments of these developments posterior to this Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage were: the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, of 1995 (Hague Convention); the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible heritage, in 2003; and the Convention on the Protection of the Diversity of Cultural Contents and Artistic Expressions, in 2005. The inclusion of the concepts of cultural landscapes in the Operational Guidelines in 1992 and the Declaration on the Conservation of Historic Urban Landscapes, in 2005, opened the way for understanding the links between the coastal landscapes and historical cities. Moreover, the preservation of heritage has been institutionalized in a level higher than governments and states, due to the characteristics of intergovernmental agreements.

Another concept that has been discussed recently is that of "cultural coastal heritage", initially because of submerged heritage. One result of this debate was the very Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage, 2001, which meant an advance in international law. Some examples before the convention give an idea of the intricate relations among cultures, nations, and current and former businesses enterprises involved on commercial's issues: the Melqart of Siacca, and the sunken vessels of the Dutch’s East India Company, one in the Australian coast, and another near the island of Bintan, now part of Indonesia.

The first case relates to a bronze statuette Phoenician harvested in the networks of an Italian fishing boat at 20 nautical miles off the coast of Sicily and gone under the protection of the city of Siacca. This case has generated a legal controversy between the municipality, the Italian state, and the heirs of the owner of the boat that found the statuette. The Dutch boats found in Australian coast generate eventually the first international treaty on underwater heritage, although the found treasures had been sold at auction and dispersed around the world. The sunken boat near the today coast of Indonesia, the Geldermalsen, carried what was termed the "Nankin Cargo" a huge amount of gold and Chinese porcelain. An auction at the Christie house spread out this treasury, what generated a controversy between countries and companies. 

These cases are examples to show the different actors involved in the issue of cultural coastal heritage - underwater heritage in these particular cases. It is clear that different cultures produced them, transported them, and eventually could consume them. The porcelain from China remains Chinese culture whether found on the seabed or on the land. It remains Chinese even if transported by Dutch vessels, and sunk on the coast of Indonesia. The question of the property of the porcelain is a juridical question. It is not an anthropological issue. For the definition of "coastal cultural heritage" in our text, it is important to emphasize that these goods show a commercial network among major coastal cities. This network exists since the early days of history, as evidence - among others - the case of statuette of Melqart Siacca. Similarly, the Dutch ships also circulated on the Atlantic coast, carrying goods produced and traded in different cities in the world. People living at the Brazilian Coast eventually consumed these goods. Many of them, objects of art, served on forming the world heritage along the Brazilian coast.

The coastal cities have always been the place of contact among different cultures and of exchanges of materials and knowledge, which made these cities usually more cosmopolitan than interior cities. These coastal cities, many with a colonial past, are more heterogeneous, and possibly more tolerant to ethical, religious, and linguistic concerns. Often these cities from the control of central power, and threatened the morale and order - at least artistic - of national States. The foreigner’s enclaves were - and they still are - common in coastal cities, which often have more in common with cities and cultures of other countries than with cities in their own countries. In today's world, "the city is metaphorically a network, the nation state is a container”. However, at all the time, the coastal cities formed a commercial and ideological network, and they were a place of development of what was or has become a cultural heritage.

The focus of this work is the fact that the cultural heritage of coastal cities has more similarities to a global network, if compared to a heritage built in the interior cities. There are also natural aspects that contribute to the distinction of the coastal cultural heritage. Among these natural aspects present in any coastal region and influencing the cultural heritage, feature the presence of the sea in the landscape, the humidity, winds, rain, and - on contemporary conditions - the risks of global warming and the increase of the level of the oceans. In this text, these aspects refer only to the natural elements that over the centuries conditioned aspects of the architectural and urban coastal heritage.

2        CULTURAL HERITAGE OF HUMANITY IN BRAZILIAN COAST

The coastline of Brazil holds three major historical centers of Cultural Heritage of Humanity, the cities of Olinda, Salvador, and Sao Luis, and three important areas Natural Heritage: the forest reserves of Atlantic Southeast; the Atol das Rocas, and the archipelago of Fernando de Noronha; and the reserves of forest in the Atlantic coast of the discovery. All historical centres, and much of the cultural heritage included in the islands and / or in the coastal area of the Atlantic forest, were part of this network of coastal cities in the colonial period and the cultural influence derived directly from different European nations, Portugal, Spain, France, and Holland, among others.

What most impresses in Olinda is the integration between the sea, vegetation, and houses of the city centre. The site chosen by the Portuguese Duarte Coelho for the deployment of the city is a promontory overlooking the sea, much wind, and a port naturally protected by reefs. We can only understand the heritage of Olinda, and of the port and city of Recife, as important elements of a commercial network formed in the dispute between the Portuguese and Dutch trade of sugar cane. From 1535, the Portuguese began the exploration of Brazil wood - which has run out quickly - and cane sugar. In the following 50 years, the business grew at a perfect trading system: the Portuguese - owners of the land - produced and exported its products, and the Dutch distributed in its consumer sales network in Europe. The sugar consumption increased incessantly and Olinda has become the most important administrative center and a residential area that included the entire northeastern Brazil.

In 1580, forty-three years after Olinda be elevated to the condition of town, the king of Portugal dies without leaving heirs, the Spaniards take the Portuguese and the Dutch kingdom, Calvinists or Jews, enemies of commercial Catholic Spain, lost the monopoly of distribution the sugar in Europe. Since 1530, the Portuguese Catholic missions had built most of the churches that make up the patrimony of Olinda, for instance. After 1580, during the Spaniard/Portuguese Kingdom, the Catholic Missions expanded that heritage:  Carmelite, in that year; Jesuits in 1583; Franciscans and Benedictines in 1585 in 1586. The churches and convents of these orders, located at privileged places, connected each other by paths and slopes that accompanied the topography of the promontory, strengthening the urban layout of the medieval city. The sugar trade with Europe, then controlled by the Spanish, created the conditions for construction or expansion of these monuments. However, in the following two decades, the Dutch created the Company of the West Indies with goals of commercial conquests. Moreover, in 1624, attacked and dominated for a while the city of Salvador, another world heritage center in the coastal area of Brazil. Defeated in Salvador, in 1625, the Dutch invaded and dominated Olinda and the entire region in the Brazilian Northeast, from 1630 to 1654. The main religious buildings of Olinda burned by the Dutch at this time, and later on rebuilt by the Portuguese preserving original elements, were the churches of Our Lady of Grace, and Our Lady of Carmel, both with Renaissance elements. Other monuments destroyed and rebuilt in Olinda were the Cathedral Church (1537), the Church of Our Lady of Mercy (1540), the Church of San Francisco (1577), the Monastery of St. Benedict (1582), and the ancient Bishop’s Palace (1676). The Dutch used the same material of the destroyed churches and residences of Olinda to build their residences in Recife, just over five kilometers to the south. The dwellers of Recife were importers and exporters, mostly Jews and Calvinists, while in Olinda they were the Portuguese owners of land.

The contrast was not only between the owners of land and traders of the port. Thanks to the cosmopolitanism of the Dutch, came to Recife urban planners, architects, engineers, and artists, including Franz Post, which painted the ruins of some churches of Olinda in their original forms. The area favored Dutch Jewish migration and especially the practice of Judaism. Under the protection Dutch, the Jews established themselves as businesspersons, importers, exporters, and as sugar industrialist. In 1645, there were about 1,500 Jews in the region, representing about 50% of Europeans. Two decades earlier, the synagogue Kahal Zur, the first in Latin America, had already being built in Recife.

The fight all over the world among Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, and French for controlling the coastal network reached other cities along the Atlantic coast. In Brazil, the Dutch, immediately since the first occupation of Salvador, Bahia, in 1624, maintained continuous struggle with the Portuguese for control of the coastal centers. Salvador was a medieval town of winding streets, an escarpment topography, with walls, doors and men of weapons (low city), contrasting with the top hill area, geographically more protected, more flat and a little more geometric (high city). Ladders, inclined planes, cranes and, later on, the Lacerda Elevator, linked the two cities. Though defeated by the Portuguese in their first attempt, the Dutch persisted with the strategy of maintaining - from the coastal cities - the military and financial control of the hinterland. Therefore, Salvador continued to be an important goal.

The Dutch seized the city in 1638. Not achieving to overcome the trenches, built like a fortress, they returned to Recife. The following year, the Portuguese tried to attack Recife by sea, but also defeated. Returning through the land, they plundered the sugar plantations controlled by the Dutch. In retaliation the Dutch attacked, through the Bahia de Todos os Santos, the Recôncavo Baiano (the watershed of the bay), destroying more than a third of sugar production controlled by the Portuguese. Besides the pillage and the pressures from the opponents, both Portuguese and Dutch administrators from coastal cities of Salvador and Recife, imposed high taxes the inland producers  as a mean of sustaining their costs of war.

Only after 1654, after the expulsion of the Dutch from Recife, the architecture of Salvador started his monumental stage, adding the Baroque. The Church of the Jesuits, today Cathedral of Salvador, the churches and convents of San Francisco and Santa Teresa, the Church of Carmel, the Church and Monastery of St. Benedict, and the Church of the Third Order of St. Francis are from this period. All these luxurious works - some clearly inspired by European models, like the Cathedral beneath Portuguese influence, and the Church and Monastery of St. Benedict, similar to Gesu Church di Roma - built thanks to the resources released by the production of sugar in the inland. This release of resources for the arts was only possible after that Portugal established the control over the coastal cities, as well as Recife grown with luxury when the Dutch dominated the coast.

Some monasteries enjoyed all the privileges, and exemptions from the fees charged by the Portuguese authorities. This increased the capacity for building, and the sumptuous of religious orders. The building of the Church and Monastery of St. Benedict, in Salvador, is an example of this. It was supposedly projected by Fray Macário of St. John, who probably used the Treaty of Architecture, from Sebastian Serlio, as base for the work. The triumphal arch of the temple has been presented as the most important element of the classic Brazilian architecture of the seventeenth century. The museum of the monastery amassed a collection of pictures, paintings, furniture, jewellery, crystal, and porcelain of the XVII and XVIII, thanks to those exemptions from the government, and from donations of the mill's owners in exchange for religious services.

São Luis, at Maranhão, more than Salvador and Olinda, had a port area characteristic. Francisco Frias the Mesquita, built the city in 1615 - soon after the expulsion of the French who gave the name to the place. Sao Luiz is certainly the first urban orthogonal area in Brazil, following the Spanish model. The French had founded the fort of St. Louis in 1612 to protect the extraction of brazil wood, a product used for dyeing of fabrics and crucial for the textile industry of Normandy. During the following three years, the Portugal established fortifications around the same area, and in 1615, the Frenchmen, encircled, surrendered themselves without fighting. In that same year the Portuguese started to plan and to construct the city adapting it to the climate, using the marine ventilation, creating areas of shadow to reduce the equatorial heat. The facades of tile reflected the sunlight, reducing the heat and protecting against humidity and rain. St. Louis acquired the condition of village in 1620, when colonizers coming from Azores arrived with the aim to cultivate sugarcane and cotton for export. The city adjusted itself to the international network of trade as well as it had adjusted to the coastal climate.

In 1641, the Dutch invaded St. Louis, controlling it until 1644, searching for Indians who could be enslaved in the plantations of sugar under the power of Recife. At this period, Frans Post painted some famous paintings of St. Louis, which are currently at the British Museum. After the withdrawal of the Dutch and their final expulsion of Brazilian coast, in 1654, the Portuguese consolidated their power over the city and created the Company of Commerce of Maranhão, monopolizing the trade of goods and slaves. On the continent, in front of the island of San Luis, on the opposite side of the Bay of Saint Mark, the landowners established themselves in Alcântara - nowadays also a national heritage of Brazil - where they built homes and palaces, which UNESCO and the Project Monumenta are helping to restore. The architecture of Alcântara associate indigenous techniques and material (such as the intertwined straw coconut) with Portuguese forms (such as the colonial sobrados, with intensive use of tiles). The sobrados are also the major renown in St. Louis, particularly those of the Chalk Street. In addition is the old church of the Jesuits, today Cathedral, the former Jesuitical college, the Convent of Mercy, the Palace of the Lions, the source of the Ribeirão, between other monuments. Furthermore the tiles of San Luiz and Alcântara, also came from Europe (Portugal, mainly, but also France and Germany), the threshold of stone and the doors of most sobrados.

Contrarily to what happened in the colonial coastal cities, in the areas that today are natural heritage of coastal Brazil - the islands in the Atlantic Forest, for instance - there was relatively few buildings, many of military nature, such as fortresses. Some small cities did not prosper as much as those large ones that would become world heritage like St Louis, Salvador, and Olinda. This was due to the same reason that ensured the preservation of natural heritage: rugged terrain, unsuitable for extensive farming or, later, for road and urban expansion. In the Southeast was founded, in 1503, the Village of Cananéia, whose the fortification of Trincheira, a battery with 6 cannons, built between 1822 and 1825, today is submerged, further than 400m of the coast. In the natural patrimony of the Coast of Discovery, the major focus is the Church of Mercy, in the historic centre of the city of Porto Seguro, urban historical area affected by excessive tourism. Rebuilt in 1776, at the same site of former chapel of the sixteenth century, the church of Mercy is simple, near to the Baroque style, and keeps an image of Christ Crucified cited in 1583 by Father Fernando Cardim.

British, French, and Dutch occupied the island of Fernando de Noronha, at the beginning of colonization due to its strategic position in terms of navigation. It has as the main buildings the fortress, and the Church of Remedios. The Portuguese completed the church in 1772 after the definitive occupation. Although there was no agricultural production to pay the wealth as in the large centers, there was a military reason that justified the construction of fortresses and the island occupation. Part of the cultural heritage included in the island of Fernando de Noronha and the coastal area of the Atlantic forest stems from the dispute among Portugal, Spain, France, and the Netherlands for the control of the coast and navigation.

3        POLICY FOR PROTECTION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE IN BRAZIL

During the period of colonization, the nation states were not the only ones to create or preserve works of cultural heritage, and less yet to built works of coastal cultural heritage. In Brazil, in that period, they limited themselves to construct some significant administrative or military building, such as government offices, jails, or fortresses. That was so because they had not the necessary resources or because they had not an ideology that could represent culturally a nation. Kingdoms and coastal cities were still constructing own states and nations. For these same reasons - lack of resources or ideology, the states could not have a policy of cultural heritage. The institutions that had these resources and this ideology were the religious institutions or economic institutions.

The religious institutions, Jewish, Calvinists or Catholic - this with their different orders - built churches, monasteries, schools, workshops, hospitals. The economic institutions built ports, markets, warehouses, storages, and commercial buildings, and residences, essential elements for the urban centres. The rulers beyond the elements of power already cited did some planning, roads, and urban services, like drinking water, drainage, and sanitation, frequently precarious and without cultural or artistic significance. Some other elements of cultural heritage derived from ethnic groups, gathered initially in urban centres, where they arrived (or to where they were brought) with their costumes, technical knowledge and beliefs, usually permeated by religion. This was the case of blacks, Indians, and some Europeans migrants. All these actors moved, as well as their products, in the network of coastal cities.

Today, the Brazilian state, but also the other states, is neither the unique nor the most qualified to build or preserve artistic works, as it was not in the past. The cultural policy of the governments does not have enough resources, and the democratic states cannot and should not construct an homogeneous ideology to merge the different cultures of each nation. The ethnic groups, religions (or ideology) and businesses still have an important role in defining and conducting public policy of culture. Besides the exponential exchange of goods and people, there is another factor, the environment. This factor is common to all nations, requesting policies to protect the heritage from threats common to all peoples: acid rain, climate change, weather variations, and increase of natural disasters such as hurricanes, tsunamis, and others. Almost all these threats annihilate in different ways the coastal areas.

The Brazilian policies of cultural protection, and coastal management, do not have the necessary resources and do not have the integration required to protect our heritage from the impacts of the urban occupation, deforestation, industrial use of the sea and the coast, oil activity, and particularly to protect it from the climate change and the increasing level of the oceans. Moreover, remains the need of civil society mobilization to ensure that the issue of protection of the coastal heritage reaches the agenda of political powers in the various administrative levels, federal, state, and municipal levels.

Although the Federal Constitution of 1988, provides guarantees of culture to the citizen, the instruments of these guarantees, the National Plan of Culture,  is still pending in Congress. The plan is essential for the deployment of a National System of Culture that integrates the various entities at the federal, state, and municipal levels, as it is necessary to institutionalize the participation of the population. In this case, participation is not purely political proselytism. Still lack social and educational formation until the population, especially the poorest, wants to consume culture. Because of this lack, there is not enough demand, from a strictly economic, to unlock the corporate wish for cultural production of quality.

The General Guidelines for a National Plan of Culture, currently under discussion, are too summary. While this may be permissible, in the few 92 pages there are only two references to the architectural ensemble. There are only three generic references to the architecture and only one to the urban heritage. There is no reference to a coastal culture in a country with more than eight thousand kilometers of coastline. Only a general reference to the fact that the occupation of Brazilian territory has been on the coast. As for the environment and tourism, the references are larger. Nevertheless, there is not even one explicit proposition for any financial tool or any legal action that stimulates what it is suggested in the Guidelines like Proposals for Action. Similarly the Guidelines does not provide for any reconciliation of legislation or financial instruments on coastal protection.

Although we can make restrictions to the Guidelines, it is expected that the discussions in the Congress should produce a detailed plan. However, the criticism should not be direct to the Ministry of Culture or to the Congress. What is impressive is that the executive power, as a whole, and the Ministry of Planning in particular, to date do not assigned yet even 1% of the federal budget for culture, which currently is around of 0.6%.

The provincial States, however, have given greater attention to their cultural heritage, particularly to urban centres included as historical heritage of humanity. And these centers, when restored, have become a promising market for tourism and open sources of revenue to the public power. The idea of an Integrated Urban Conservation, developed from the European Letter of Architectural Heritage (September 26th, 1975) and in the Declaration of Amsterdam (October 25th, 1975), resulted in good applications in the cities of Recife, Salvador, and The St. Louis. In the last three decades, at these urban centers, the local authorities established partnership with private sources of financing, and developed the notion that the whole society should benefit from the restorations made by the public funds.  The Plan of Neighborhood Revitalization of Recife, in joint operation with the private sector, and with assistance with Inter-American Development Bank, restored historic buildings in the areas of Bom Jesus and Alfândega, and rehabilitated the area of Pilar. The Program of Recovery of Historic Center of Salvador completely restored the area of Pelourinho: dozens of blocks, hundreds of properties, and nine ruins recovered with public investment of about 10 millions euros. In the Plan of Preservation of Historic Center of St. Louis, including the Housing and Social Promotion Subprogram, the private participation was lower, but still the results were significant. In all the three cases highlighted is the role of the private interest, of the multilateral bank, and of public regulations. Furthermore, since the decade of 90, the financial tools of the Rouanet Law, and of the Law on Patronage, allowed private companies to apply more than 40 million euros in the reconstruction of material heritage throughout the country.

Conclusions

In respect of a good part of materials and artists, the built world heritage on the Brazilian coast is an heritage of European origin. Another part is an African and indigenous heritage, in respect to manpower and some construction techniques developed or adapted by these groups. Regarding the coastal intangible heritage, the importance of the latter two groups is more significant, but about the built heritage, countries, business, and religious institutions of European origin are the most important sources of resources and techniques. It is in the interest of the European Community to participate in the protection of European heritage because this patrimony, in many ways, is an extension of Europe and a demonstration of the network of coastal cities created by Europeans during the construction of the New World. On the other hand, the extraction of Brazil wood and extent of agricultural crops of cane sugar to the European consumption was responsible for the devastation of much of the natural patrimony of the Brazilian coast, especially the Atlantic forest.

The establishment of a market of cultural heritage coastal is in the interest of European companies, and of European institutions - governmental and non-governmental institutions such as religious, philanthropic, environmental and even ethnic and political. Also for a European public, the protection of our coastal cities, heritage of humanity in Brazil, incorporates values:  of direct use, such as recreation and education, choice of future potential uses (with the preservation and maintenance of these centers), the so-called existential values, measured by philanthropic wishes to donate money or services, and the values of preservation for future generations. Furthermore, an increase in European tourism represents benefits and impacts, especially regarding the maintenance of the heritage. This maintenance, after periods of recovery of the Brazilian coastal cities, has been a problem despite the fact of eventual incentives granted to owners of property. The physical obsolescence results from the deterioration of structures, facilities and finishing, and from the conditions of rain, humidity, and urban activities (traffic and noise).

To that an eventual European participation in the recovery and maintenance of coastal cities to be effective, it is necessary to support networks of cultural and financial management, which include networks of coastal protection of built heritage. These networks may comprise governmental organizations, but they should be essentially non-governmental, in Brazil and Europe, connecting business, academic, philanthropic and others. Some networks already include coastal management to protect the cultural heritage as a significant element of its missions, but their performances need some support, not only financial but also of qualification and training. Among the main networks of coastal management in Brazil worried with the cultural heritage coastal are Red Ibermar, the network marine coastal Rema-Brasil, supported by Avina, and the network Gerco, from Agência Costeira.

These networks are pioneers in the integration between the coastal management and cultural preservation, but they need to enlarge their shares in the sector of protection of historical city centres. Europe would contribute to the maintenance and protection of these historic coastal centers that she helped build over the centuries, giving support to these networks and creating new, especially in different sectors of business (tourism, environment, shipping, ports) that showing particular interest in culture.

References

Dye, T. R., 2002, Understanding Public Policy.  10th ed, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Hall, C.M., Jenkins, J.M. (1995). Tourism and public policy. Routledge, London.

Stone, D., 2008, Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks, Policy Studies Journal, February, 1.

Harrison, D., 2005, Introduction: contested narratives in the domain of the world heritage, in “Politics of the world heritage. Negotiating tourism and conservation”, by Harrison, David and Hitchcock, Michael. Multilingual Matters.

Van Der Aa, B., Groote, P., and Huigen, P., 2005. World heritage as nimby? The Case of the Dutch part of the Wadden Sea. In “Politics of the World Heritage. Negotiating Tourism and Conservation”, in “Politics of the world heritage. Negotiating tourism and conservation” by Harrison, David., and Hitchcock., Michael.

Hoffman, B., 2006. Art and cultural heritage: law, policy, and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York.

Scovazzi, T., 2003. The application of the “salvage law and other rules of admiralty” to the underwater cultural heritage: some relevant cases, in “The Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. Before and After the 2001”,  Unesco Convention, by Garabello, Roberta., and Scovazzi, Tullio., Martinus Nijhof Publishers.

Rohlen, T., 2002. Cosmopolitan cities and nation states: open economics, urban dynamics, and government in East Asia. Asia/Pacific Research Center, Stanford University.   http://www.ciaonet.org/wps/rot03/rot03.pdf .

Unesco.,2000. Patrimônio mundial no Brasil. Caixa Econômica Federal, Brasília.

Hernández, M. 2007. Notas sobre o patrimônio artístico do Mosteiro de São Bento da Bahia. Revista Ohun, ano3, n.3, p.114-135, set.2007.    http://www.revistaohun.ufba.br/PDFs/artigo5.pdf .

Ministério da Cultura., 2007. Caderno “Diretrizes gerais para o Plano Nacional de Cultura”. Brasília. http://www.cultura.gov.br/pn .

Vieira, N., 2007. The applicability of the declaration of Amsterdam in Brazil: case studies of Bairro do Recife, Pelourinho, and Praia Grande. City & Time 3 (2): 7. http://www.ct.ceci-br.org .

Shluger, E.. 2001. Culture and development in Brazil: promoting public-private partnerships in heritage preservation. Latin American Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, September, 2001.

* This paper was presented at the 9^th International Conference of Littoral 2008 “A Changing Coast: Challenge for the Environmental Policies”, Venice, Italy, November 25-28, 2008, on Topic 7 “Natural and Human Interactions in the Coastal Zone: Co-Evaluation or Impact”. Abstract: ISBN 88-89405-04-X

ÚLTIMO RECURSO, ME FAZER DE URSO!

Carta enviada há anos à então Ministra Marina Silva, no governo do Lula. Publico porque ela dá uma dimensão do que era e é a burocracia da social democracia! A violência burocrática do Estado social democrático continua a mesma.

Sra. Ministra de Estado

Maria Osmarina Marina da Silva Vaz de Lima

Ministério do Meio Ambiente

Esplanada dos Ministérios, Bloco B, 5^o. andar,

70068-900 – Brasília – DF

Prezada Ministra

Há um verso de Cassiano Ricardo que diz: último recurso, me fazer de urso para a alegria das crianças. O surrealismo está no fato do desespero e a agressividade estarem juntos em uma quase brincadeira de crianças, e é neste mesmo surrealismo que me encontro há quase um ano graças a uma permanente intimidação por parte do Ibama. Para não levar a público esta situação, meu último recurso é escrever-lhe uma carta que nunca sei se lhe chegará já que o poder muitas vezes conduz ao isolamento.

Sou um funcionário público aposentado pelo Município do Rio de Janeiro e ainda com uma matrícula como Professor Adjunto do Departamento de Ciência Política da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro que, espero, breve também se transforme em uma merecida aposentadoria. Durante a minha vida de servidor tive a oportunidade de ser Sub-Secretário de Meio Ambiente do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, durante a Eco-92, e duas vezes Sub-Secretário do Município do Rio de Janeiro, uma na Secretaria de Obras e Serviços Públicos e outra na Secretaria de Urbanismo. Fui Presidente da Comlurb, uma das maiores empresas públicas de limpeza urbana. Fui Presidente do Grupo Executivo de Despoluição da Baía de Guanabara e pude junto com meus colegas desenvolver, apresentar, negociar e aprovar o Plano de Despoluição que o BID e o Japan Bank financiaram para a Guanabara. Há mais de 20 anos trabalho com a área de meio ambiente. Nos últimos anos servi ao atual governo como Diretor de Planejamento Estratégico da Fundação Oswaldo Cruz – Fiocruz.

Não pretendo me estender em meu currículo, bastando-me dizer que em toda a minha vida de servidor público nunca tive um uma multa, um reparo, uma repreensão que fosse, por nenhuma ação minha, nunca nenhum Tribunal de Contas, seja municipal, estadual ou federal, me imputou qualquer erro.

Após a minha aposentadoria fundei, fui o primeiro e sou o atual presidente do Instituto Baía de Guanabara, Organização da Sociedade Civil de Interesse Público que trabalha com o meio ambiente e com os grupos pobres da Baía de Guanabara. Junto comigo encontra-se a Sra. Dora Hees de Negreiros, superintendente do IBG, ex-diretora da FEEMA, e muitos outros ex-servidores que, embora não estejam no aparelho de Estado, continuam servindo ao público. No IBG pude realizar projetos com o Fundo Nacional do Meio Ambiente, do MMA, tendo um dos nossos projetos sido escolhido para estar entre os oitos melhores financiados por aquele fundo. Trabalhamos com a Petrobrás e com diversos outros níveis administrativos incluindo principalmente algumas das prefeituras dos municípios mais pobres no entorno da Guanabara.

Coube a administração atual do Ibama me envolver em um processo kafkiano onde sou acusado de agir irregularmente em um convênio do IBG com aquele instituto, convênio este ajustado com a administração anterior para apresentar um plano de gestão da APA de Guapi-Mirim. Entre as acusações estão as de que eu não teria cumprido a legislação, particularmente a Lei 8.666, ao contratar a direção e alguns técnicos para o desenvolvimento do projeto; ao efetuar gastos miúdos sem que usasse cheques nominais; e ao realizar reuniões que me foram solicitadas pela área técnica do Ibama. Não tenho nenhuma dúvida quanto à lisura dos meus atos. Como todos bons administradores sabem, um convênio difere em muito dos contratos; a maior parte de serviços técnicos especializados, mesmo quando contratada pelo serviço público, é definida pela qualidade técnica e não pelo menor preço. O IBG foi escolhido para o convênio com o Ibama pela sua qualidade técnica, já que não se pode conceber que um estudo sobre o manejo da APA de Guapi-Mirim pudesse ser feito por quem quer que fosse, desqualificado tecnicamente, que se apresentasse em uma concorrência por menor preço. Por outro lado, é inconcebível pensar que custos ínfimos como passagens de ônibus para os caranguejeiros de Guapi-Mirim, a área mais miserável da Guanabara, pudessem ser pagos por cheques nominais. Finalmente, os próprios técnicos do Ibama aprovaram e elogiaram o plano feito pelo IBG, incluindo as reuniões necessárias para que se estabelecesse a metodologia de gestão.

Também não vou me alongar na minha explicação já que além da consciência limpa tenho em minha defesa um dos melhores advogados da área administrativa no Rio de Janeiro, que, por acaso, vem a ser advogado do PT e do candidato do partido no Rio de Janeiro. Mas devo ressaltar duas coisas: não me refiro ao PT para usufruir eventuais intimidades com o poder já que eu mesmo me afastei da Diretoria da Fiocruz porque não podia conceber a esquizofrenia de ser ordenador de despesa de um governo onde o Ibama ameaça colocar meu nome no SIAFI como se eu fosse um bandido. A segunda ressalva é que eu não tenho recursos para ter como meu advogado uma pessoa desta qualidade e que só o tenho porque é meu parente e não cobra pela defesa do IBG e a minha. E não tenho recursos porque vivo de meus salários de aposentado e de professor e no IBG exerço minha função como voluntário – porque assim nos obrigamos em nosso estatuto – e nunca recebi um só tostão desta OSCIP.

No início imaginei que pudesse conversar com alguns dirigentes do Ibama e mostrar-lhes a insensatez da conduta que tomaram. Cheguei a pensar em falar com amigos meus como o Liszt, diretor do Jardim Botânico, o Minc, ou o Gabeira, o Sirkis, de quem eu fui sub-secretário de urbanismo do Rio de Janeiro, o Axel Grael, que é associado e ex-presidente do IBG, para que pudessem atestar o meu caráter. Cheguei a pensar em procurar muitos amigos da Fiocruz que conheceram o Presidente do Ibama quando este era chefe do Escritório Técnico de Manaus. Finalmente decidi que não se faz assim e resolvi, eu mesmo, ligar para o presidente do Ibama e pedir uma entrevista onde eu pudesse explicar o que eu acreditava ser um mal-entendido. Telefonei, mandei e-mail, falei com as secretárias e com alguns diretores do Ibama pedindo, apenas, que o presidente me concedesse uma entrevista. O máximo que consegui foi uma amável resposta do Chefe de Gabinete ao meu telefonema dizendo que o recurso administrativo proposto pelo meu advogado estava sendo analisado pela auditoria do Ibama.

Fui agora surpreendido por uma segunda carta me ameaçando com “medidas cabíveis” e me cobrando juros e correções monetárias de todo o recurso usado para a realização do convênio, pouco mais de cem mil reais agora transformados em quase cento e oitenta mil reais. Se o IBG tivesse feito um convênio para construir uma ponte, é mais ou menos como se o Ibama, agora, depois da ponte construída, resolver recuperar todo o dinheiro que adiantou, com juros e correções monetárias. Mais do que uma atividade bancária isto se configura como o verdadeiro conto do vigário. O IBG fez o Plano de Gestão de Guapi-Mirim e foi elogiado por isto e, pasme (!!), há uma semana, foi convidado por autoridade do Ibama Rio para ser a Secretaria Executiva do Conselho Gestor da APA de Guapi-Mirim, conselho este que representa a execução mais perfeita do plano para o qual nos conveniamos.

Diante do surrealismo que estou vivendo, da agressividade com que estou sendo tratado pelos técnicos do Ibama e da brincadeira infantil em que isto se tornou, é que sou obrigado a utilizar o meu último recurso, apelar a uma Ministra para que a burocracia do Ibama não me trate como inimigo – que ainda não sou – por razões que eu desconheço. Talvez pelo simples fato de eu ter assinado um convênio com um governo anterior, pelo fato de ter sugerido e apoiado a permanência do ex-Superintendente do Ibama-Rio, cargo ocupado por pessoa que, por acaso, era ex-cunhado do ex-ministro, ministro que vem a ser filho do atual Presidente do Senado.

Sra. Ministra, não sei qual a razão desta situação em que fui colocado e não lhe peço nenhum favor. O que eu lhe peço é que o Ibama faça cumprir a lei, mas que não me mantenha sob permanente intimidação porque eu não mereço isto. Se os dirigentes do Ibama estão certos de que cumprem a lei, então não a manipulem como ameaça. Façam o que querem fazer acreditar como sendo correto e assumam as conseqüências jurídicas de seus atos. Tenho plena consciência de que o poder do Estado, mesmo quando utilizado inconseqüentemente, é maior que o poder dos indivíduos, mas esteja certa, Sra. Ministra, de que isto não me intimida.

Atenciosamente

Manuel A.P. Sanches

Presidente do Instituto Baía de Guanabara

É bom que se diga que, depois desta carta, o "processo kafkiano" simplesmente desapareceu!

A QUARTA PATA DO ELEFANTE.

O quê a Marina Silva tem atravessado na garganta? Que flecha é essa que ela mesma construiu e que tem duas pontas, cada uma pertencente a uma tribo diferente? E ela ainda tentou esclarecer, mais do que duas pontas são três, uma voltada para o interlocutor e duas (que supostamente podem ser vistas como uma cauda, segundo Marina) voltadas para si mesma. Mais do que os antropólogos, Freud tem que ser ressuscitado para esclarecer a política: uma flecha atravessada na garganta já é demais e é muito mais do que um adereço. Ela mesma admitiu que as metáforas são modos de conhecer e de raciocinar! Citando a si mesma e ao Lula como metafóricos, disse que não queria matar nem a Dilma nem o Aécio e, curiosamente, quis-nos fazer entender que a flecha é estendida para o outro como uma forma de aliança. Ah, e ainda tem o arco, que segundo ela, é o colar que envolve o pescoço e de onde, suponho, a flecha é atirada. Haja garganta, haja Freud, e haja antropologia para entender o que se passa acima do pescoço da Marina.

E ela ainda disse que, atualmente, tem um grande interesse pela psicoanálise! Isto me agrada porque tem muita coisa nela, Marina, que precisa ser decifrada para que possamos adotá-la!

O que será que está atravessado na sua, dela, garganta? Será a Dilma? Será o PT? Ou será a social democracia, esta parte de trás com duas pontas (o PT e o PSDB) que precisa ser ultrapassada em um processo de "consciência progressiva". E para onde se estende essa ponta da frente, esta aliança agressiva e ameaçadora? Será ainda a social democracia do PSB. A esquerda é um "arco/colar" que enforca a goela da Marina?

Ao menos ela sabe juntar sujeito (ao qual ela sempre se refere como "novo" sujeito), verbo e predicado. Apesar dos pequeníssimos erros de gramática (quem não os tem), Marina consegue ir articulando pé e cabeça, criança e animal, no dia dos professores. Melhor que a Dilma. Mas ainda continua fixada na figura do pai, do Lula e do Chico Mendes. Afinal, a psicoanálise poderá ajudar a adquirir uma consciência progressivamente. Vamos aguardar.

Me lembro sempre de uma passagem do Levi-Strauss sobre a quarta pata do elefante, a qual os selvagens se referiam quando viam uma cerâmica onde havia a pintura de um elefante, onde só apareciam três patas. Deste elefante que é a social democracia, já temos o PT, o PSDB, e o PSB. Só faltava a quarta pata. Espero que a Marina escape deste rede. Afinal, a psicoanálise poderá ajudar.

SOCIAL DEMOCRACIA PETISTA, PEDÓFILOS E INFRINGENTES

A justiça social democrata petista resolveu indiciar cinco jovens por "formação de quadrilha" como modo de mantê-los encarcerados. Estes jovens tinham sido acusados de vândalos e baderneiros, mas isso não dá cadeia imediata, e a social democracia quer vê-los na cadeia.

José Dirceu quando jovem participou de manifestações violentas que a social democracia defendia como lutas contra um Estado autoritário [o que era verdade]. Mais tarde tornou-se Chefe da Casa Civil da social democracia petista e "chefe da quadrilha" que assaltou os cofres públicos, segundo a condenação do Supremo Tribunal Federal. É isso mesmo! Ele está condenado! Mas... teve direito aos embargos infringentes e, segundo o próprio Presidente do Supremo deverá ser absolvido do crime de formação de quadrilha.

Um dos jovens presos ontem também foi indiciado por pedofilia "pois foram encontradas fotos com menores" (A Agência Brasil, do governo social democrata petista não informa onde nem como). Curiosamente, a Ministra Maria do Rosário, da social democracia petista, "adotou um silêncio obsequioso diante do escândalo envolvendo Eduardo Giaevski, petista que responde a 23 processos por estupro de vulneráveis e que estava foragido desde que soube do mandado de prisão expedido pela Justiça do Paraná". Há um mês, "antes de ser internado para tratar de depressão profunda, o ex-assessor de Gleisi ameaçava a ex-chefe e o partido com a possibilidade de contar o que sabe (e não é pouco) sobre os esquemas de caixa 2 nas prefeituras do PT, assim como detalhes dos bastidores da Casa Civil." Ele já saiu da área psiquiátrica, mas não sem antes dizer que Gleisi o conhece muito bem e sabe “tudo” sobre ele. Inclusive sobre sua preferência por “mulheres jovens”. E disse ainda que que não será de forma alguma um novo Celso Daniel.

Será que os manifestantes, que não são da social democracia petista e não têm o que revelar, terão direito a embargos infringentes e ao silêncio da Ministra? Será que os manifestantes, que não são da social democracia petista e não têm o que revelar, terão direito a embargos infringentes e ao silêncio da Ministra?

PLUNCT, PLACT, ZUM, NÃO VAI A LUGAR NENHUM!

A Social Democracia brasileira, com todas as suas vertentes e vertigens, é uma espécie de foguete infantil: não vai a lugar nenhum! Há 25 anos substituindo a ditadura militar no Brasil, os sociais democratas repetem o fracasso econômico, político e social dos 25 anos de seus antecessores. Há cinquenta anos o Brasil restringe todas as liberdades (econômica, política e social, repito) dos brasileiros, e patina feliz.

Mas, ah, dizem eles: houve o plano real que nos deu estabilidade econômica (para o caso dos advogados do PSDB); e houve o “bolsa família” que nos deu redistribuição de renda, dizem os defensores do trabalhismo petismo. E, depois, cospem uns nos outros, deixando a Internacional Socialista atordoada reconhecendo como sociais democratas o PDT (Deus nos valha!) e como observadores os “socialistas” de Eduardo Campos e Marina Silva.  O esculacho da social democracia no Brasil é tão grande que o PSDB, PT, PTB, PPS, PSB, todos se dizem sociais democrata e abanam o rabo para a Internacional Socialista na tentativa de obterem um carimbo de reconhecimento.

O que os torna iguais é que todos adoram o Estado, mamam (ou querem mamar) nas burocracias “públicas” que incham a cada dia que passa, impondo a todos nós uma brutal carga de impostos, taxas, tarifas e o diabo a quatro. Todos reverenciam o que chamam de Estado do Bem Estar, que deve ser do bem estar deles, porque para a população (de todas as faixas etárias!), que paga os impostos, é que não é. Todos apregoam as supostas benesses que o Estado pode ou deve oferecer, esquivando-se das consequências desastrosas não só para o conjunto da população atual como para a futura. Os exemplos dos desastres sociais democratas (Portugal, Espanha, Grécia, só para citar os mais atuais, sem falar na catástrofe da Alemanha pré-guerra) são rapidamente trocados pelas ruidosas manifestações contra os governos, quaisquer governos, que tentam remediar o buraco. Sobretudo, quando chegam ao poder, tratam de esconder que o Estado de Bem Estar é subvencionado por toda a população para o consumo conspícuo dos parasitas estatais.

Esta história de usufruir do Estado vem de longe e chega hoje ao capitalismo coroado, de compadrio, onde grandes empresas e bancos, associados (acumpliciados seria melhor dizer) à alta burocracia estatal monopolizam e distorcem os investimentos, arrasando qualquer possibilidade de competição e alterando o mecanismo do mercado que reduz a apropriação de renda e equaliza preços aos custos. Não preciso me referir ao “X” desta questão.Esta história vem de longe e merece outras postagens que farei depois.

A MENTIRA TEM PERNAS CURTAS

É MENTIRA: "Nos vinte anos durante os quais a ditadura perdurou, O GLOBO, nos períodos agudos de crise, mesmo sem retirar o apoio aos militares, sempre cobrou deles o restabelecimento, no menor prazo possível, da normalidade democrática."

O GLOBO EM NENHUM MOMENTO RETIROU O APOIO AOS MILITARES.

Eu trabalhava em O Globo nesta época. A única verdade é que Roberto Marinho contratava pessoas de esquerda que não tinham nenhuma outra opção de trabalho. E dizia-se, naquela época, que RM contratava a direita, porque "sabia a mandar" e a esquerda porque "sabia trabalhar". E, naquela época, a dicotomia esquerda/direita tinha sentido. Não se trata de punir O Globo por toda a eternidade. O reconhecimento do erro é importante, mas é preciso que ele seja sincero e é preciso que haja uma reparação; senão o perdão não é possível. E eu tenho o sentimento de que o arrependimento ainda não é sincero. O Globo ainda pretende justificar o arrependimento com o argumento de que outros jornais também apoiaram o golpe de 1964. É verdade, mas também é verdade que somente O Globo continuou apoiando, e é por isso que conseguiu sobreviver até hoje. O Correio da Manhã, onde eu também trabalhei, foi empastelado! O Jornal do Brasil morreu à mingua. O arrependimento de O Globo, para ser sincero, precisa dizer claramente que apoiou a ditadura por todo o tempo em que ela existiu, e que só deixou de apoiá-la por puro oportunismo já que a democracia batia a sua porta. É uma pena que este arrependimento venha junto com tantas explicações. e, por isso, ele ainda não tem validade. Melhor seria dizer: O Globo apoiou a ditadura e se arrepende. Ponto!