Sunday, May 29, 2016

Sequel, or Rerun?

Photo Credit: Gareth Leonard

Wandering the aisles of a grocery store on my first day in Rio, a long-forgotten detergent jingle slipped back into my head. It was only when I got to the checkout line that I realized my cart was a nine-year-old's fantasy: cookies, chocolate milk, candy bars and yogurt-- not a vegetable in sight.

Until our move back to Brazil, my relationship with the country was stuck in 1998. But I'm reminded daily that this is not the country I left behind.

In spite of their breezy and jovial stereotypes, Brazilians are self-critical to an extreme. A casual conversation with a stranger will quickly turn into a stoning of Brazil's corruption, inefficiency and uncultured citizens.

"Why go to Brazil? All there is to see are poverty and slums," a relative said on the eve of our move. "It's less developed than countries in Africa," warned another.

Brazilians wear their cynicism with pride--the curated wariness of the wise. This deep-rooted pessimism unites residents of every social class. But it's not without cause. Brazilians hold on for dear life as the country rides through the chronic booms and busts of a cyclical economy. One day investors are rushing into the country with seemingly insatiable demand for its resources, and the next, savings turn to dust in shuttered banks and bankrupt stores.

Still, coming back after 20 years, it is difficult not to spot signs of progress everywhere I look. Gone are the gaunt children and young mothers begging for money at every red light. Gambian immigrants have replaced kids and teenagers selling food and toys on the beach. Housekeepers armed with fresh labor rights are no longer confined to matchbox rooms in the back of the home, working 15-day shifts.

These snapshots of development are not the rose-colored outlook of a returning traveler. Forty million Brazilians--one out of every five--have been lifted out of poverty since the mid 1990's, thanks in part to popular cash transfer programs like Bolsa Familia. From 2001 to 2007, Brazil managed to cut the percentage of people living in extreme poverty in half.

But less than two months before what was supposed to be Brazil's shining debut at the Olympics, the mood in Rio is decisively sour.

Brazilians see the progress of the last two decades slipping through their fingers. Slowly but surely, hunger and inequality are creeping back. Crime is swelling in the city as the government fights to keep a lid on drug trafficking and "pacify" the favelas.

The more cynical among us saw it coming. "It'll never last," friends said in 2007, when Brazil became the darling of investors.

Last weekend we climbed the Arpoador, an ungainly bolder jutting off the coast of Ipanema. Dozens moseyed up, surveying their city from another perspective. Rio dazzles. The city is a sensational juxtaposition of graffiti-tattooed buildings and flamboyant mountains. On cue, the spectators took their seats. Everyone applauded as the sun surrendered, celebrating the end of one more day.


2 comments:

  1. It's quite nice to read your remarks coming back to Brazil, Marina. I'd like to point out that porverty started to shift when (finally) Brazil decided to play by international rules, during Itamar Franco's presidency. Inflation was rampant, and controlling public debt and reducing inflation close to zero made a real impact on people living below the poverty line. That's the main reason that Fernando Henrique Cardoso (who was in charge of finances during Itamar's presidency) won the 1994 election by a landslide. Cash transfer programs began around that time too, being tied to education, forcing parents to put kids at school. The idea was not even FHC's, it began with the mayor of Campinas, that pitched the idea. I became more widespread during Lula's presidency, which was a good thing, but lacked some controls so it would not be abused. Things began to "go south" when Dilma took over and decided to run the economy by her own klutzy and irresponsible rules.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks! Great background and important context!

    ReplyDelete