Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Fidel Castro e Aécio Neves

Were Brazilian Protests an Anti-Marxist Counter-Revolution?

avatar

Socialist Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff faced, according to FoxNews, massive demonstrations protesting against corruption and calling for her impeachment last Sunday (March 15).

Different from FoxNews, which is a huge conservative news outlet, Cliff Kincaid announced in his small outlet that the Brazilian demonstrations were an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution.”

Kincaid said, “Such a development would be a major blow to the anti-American left in Latin America, which has been operating since 1990 under the rubric of the São Paulo Forum, a pro-communist movement started by Rousseff’s predecessor, Luiz Inácio Lula de Silva, and Fidel Castro.”

The Brazilian protests were not about Marxism. Any anti-Marxism expression was an isolated event. The protests were, according to Reuters, about “a sluggish economy, rising prices and corruption.”

When Brazilians are discontent, they protest. The same demonstrators would protest Barack Obama if discontent with him.

Many Brazilians who live in the U.S. are discontent with Rousseff, but not with Obama.

Last year, Obama announced a major amnesty benefiting millions of immigrants. Many of those benefited are Brazilians, who are fleeing from the leftist hell in Brazil, but by being aided by Obama, they are also aiding to produce a leftist hell in the U.S.

A Brazilian friend helped spread Kincaid’s article about an alleged “anti-Marxist counter-revolution” in Brazil. Frequently, he attacks Rousseff, because she is a Marxist. But he praised Obama’s amnesty. I told him that conservative Americans did not like Obama’s amnesty because it is a handout. He answered that the important thing is Brazilian immigrants need it and so he praised such wonderful policy for immigrants.

In general terms, this is the profile of an “anti-Marxist” Brazilian in Kincaid’s piece.

A true anti-Marxist counter-revolution would be characterized especially by a moral fight against two fundamental banners of the U.S. and Brazilian Left: abortion and the homosexual agenda.

Yet, a fight against abortion and the tyrannical homosexual agenda had no place in what Kincaid termed “anti-Marxist counter-revolution” in Brazil.

In fact, Monday (March 16), just one day after the massive demonstrations, Catholic Levy Fidelix, a former Brazilian presidential candidate, was condemned to pay a fine of R$ 1 million (over US$300,000) in a public civil action filed by the LGBT movement. There was no massive or even small demonstration in his support.

He was condemned because in the last Brazilian presidential election he made pro-family declarations. The other main contenders — Dilma Rousseff, Aécio Neves and Marina Silva — also lambasted him for his pro-family view.

Evangelical Marina was the candidate of the Brazilian Socialist Party, and was heavily involved in the anti-Rousseff protests. Does a socialist fighting a socialist look like an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”?

Because he knew I am a Brazilian, a minister with some evangelical churches in the U.S. praised Silva, saying that she is a conservative evangelical politician who absolutely fights abortion and the gay agenda. I asked him where he had read it, because in her history, Silva never undertook such fight. I emphasized that she always was leftwing. He said that he had read about her strong evangelical “conservatism” in the U.S. mainstream media.

Neves, admired by most demonstrators, had his candidacy built by Marxist strategist David Axelrod, a longtime top Obama adviser. Does a socialist helping a socialist look like an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”?

Even so, Kincaid said, “President Barack Obama’s fellow Marxist, Dilma Rousseff.”

It is correct to say that Obama and Rousseff are Marxist. But they are not fellows. Rousseff and her administration have had a very hard time with Obama and his administration because of NSA and its economic espionage against Brazil.

There is a big difference between pro-U.S. Marxists and anti-U.S. Marxists. Neves is in the former group; Rousseff is in the latter one. Yet, Rousseff is not totally anti-U.S. Her administration has faithfully supported every pro-sodomy measure by the U.S. in the United Nations.

There is a picture of Neves with Fidel Castro. Even so, he and Marina Silva, a radical environmentalist, were portrayed in the U.S. mainstream media as “conservative.” They were the leading political figures in the massive demonstrations.

In this point, you could think then that the massive protests were pro-U.S. and pro-Obama Marxists protesting anti-U.S. Marxists. Hardly an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”!

Basically, Brazilians protesting Rousseff because of rising prices would also protest Obama if he backtracked in his amnesty policy benefiting millions of immigrants, including Brazilians. While Obama does not backtrack in his handout, Brazilian immigrants in the U.S. will keep attacking only Rousseff.

What about if Socialist Aécio Neves and environmentalist Marina Silva agreed to denounce the São Paulo Forum to destroy Rousseff’s socialist party, the Workers’ Party? Would Marxism be politically destroyed in Brazil? No. There is a bigger threat: the National Conference of Bishops of Brazil (NCBB).

Professor Hermes Rodrigues Nery, a prominent Catholic pro-life leader in Brazil, said recently that NCBB is “an extension of the São Paulo Forum.” It was a generous charge.

Actually, Marxist NCBB is credited, by many Catholic conservative and pro-life leaders, as the original creator of the Workers’ Party. And as a mother nurses her baby, NCBB nursed its red monster.

Above all, long before the São Paulo Forum’s birth, there was a NCBB guiding Brazil, the largest Catholic nation in the world, into socialism.

Ignoring the Brazilian reality, Cliff Kincaid said, “The protests in Brazil are giving hope to those who see an opportunity to defeat Marxism in the Western hemisphere.”

If Brazil is the best example of an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution” that Kincaid is able to see, then it is no wonder that Obama is at the White House.

Immediately after Rousseff’s reelection, her opponents made a petition in the White House asking help from Obama. Nowhere the petition mentioned the threat of abortion policies and the homosexual agenda. But it mentioned “São Paulo Forum” and said, “We call a White House position in relation to communist expansion in Latin America.”

Oh, my God! Does people asking help from a socialist produce an “anti-Marxist counter-revolution”?

The most important Marxist today is at the White House. Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, quoted often by Kincaid, said recently: “Because I am just a legal resident and not an American citizen, I cannot get involved actively in the anti-Obama fight, but I believe that this fight is the ONLY thing that matters today.”

The most important fight — against Obama and his wicked policies — has been one of the main focuses of my ministry, because the Obama administration is impacting the whole world. I would not avoid this calling even if threatened of losing a chance to get a U.S. citizenship.

Of course, the other huge threat is Islam, the greatest murder machine in the history. Its main victims have been Christians.

But Kincaid (and Obama!) has been focusing his attacks and provocations on Russia. Kincaid’s radicalism does not spare even pro-family events in Russia. Last year, an international conservative pro-family congress was held at the Kremlin, attended even by an Inter-American Institute (IAI) fellow. But Kincaid preferred to join the U.S. homosexual militant and radical Marxist chorus who attacked the event and the Russian laws banning homosexual propaganda for children.

Another IAI member recommended the book “The War Against Putin: What the Government-Media Complex Isn’t Telling You About Russia” to me and made it clear that he disagreed with the radical criticism of some Americans against the Russian president.

While Kincaid and other ultranationalist Americans are heavily busy attacking Russia, Obama and neocons are trying to destroy pro-family cultures by advancing their Marxist revolution and imposing around the world their pro-sodomy, pro-Marxism, pro-abortion and pro-Islam policies.

To denounce, expose and fight Obama’s pro-abortion, pro-sodomy and pro-Islam Marxist revolution — that is the ONLY thing that matters today.

Portuguese version of this article: Os protestos foram uma contrarrevolução antimarxista?



 

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Trending Now on BarbWire.com

Send this to a friend