Dissatisfied with Lula’s election? Psychologists point out ways to elaborate the result

Using the moment of frustration to reflect on the importance of dialogue and respecting differences in democratic societies is the strategy recommended by experts to those who were dissatisfied with the victory of PT Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) in the presidential elections.

According to psychiatrists and psychologists, the moment of social tension signals a psychic illness in society, and not an individual mental health condition.

“Individually, people can express that they are hurt, that they do not agree. The danger is to do this by joining a collective and turning into an angry crowd”, says social psychologist Ivani Oliveira.

“When we are in the crowd, we lose parameters of ethical coexistence and moral evaluation of the situation. We can use violence in an exacerbated and disproportionate way.”

In partnership with political psychology specialist Flávia Eugenio, Oliveira coordinated conversation circles between the 2018 presidential elections to address the topic, which is increasingly frequent among patients. Today, they approach the subject in individual consultations.

“In the week that preceded the elections, almost all the assistance had to do with anguish related to the electoral period”, says Eugenio.

For Oliveira, the moment is opportune for the group that feels dissatisfied with Lula’s victory to reflect on important issues that emerged during the electoral dispute, such as the need to dissociate politics and religion. In addition, the psychologist signals that the time is ripe for reflection on which Jair Bolsonaro (PL) guidelines these people really agreed with.

“It is possible that they did not agree with everything that was proposed and done by Bolsonaro, but that they could not express opposing opinions because that would jeopardize what they were defending at that moment. thinking ‘did I really agree with everything?’, says Oliveira.

Paulo Amarante, psychiatrist and senior researcher at LAPS (Laboratory of Studies and Research in Mental Health and Psychosocial Care) at ENSP/Fiocruz (Sergio Arouca National School of Public Health at Fundação Oswaldo Cruz), says that those who are dissatisfied should try to open up to the appeasement and for the construction of dialogue with those who think differently. Recognizing the other in their diversity is also central, says the psychiatrist.

Amarante emphasizes that understanding suffering beyond its individual perspective helps to realize that problem solving has nothing to do with psychiatry, but with political reality.

“It is important to think about the political implications of this moment not only for you, but for the country. We need to rebuild principles of collectivity, good coexistence and solidarity”, he says.

For Angelo Costa, social psychologist and professor at PUC-RS (Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul), those who lost the elections must understand that democracy is based on dialogue and that conciliation is necessary to compose common solutions, preferably better than those originally thought.

According to Costa, the scenario of political and social tension points to an illness in society, since the right thing is that we live in spaces where differences are accepted and encouraged.

“A healthy society, from the point of view of political psychology, is open and resilient to divergence and contrary thinking”, says Costa “Our society is sick because it can no longer accept the debate of ideas free of violence.”

Ana Paula Guljor, psychiatrist and president of Abrasme (Brazilian Association of Mental Health), points out that, when feeling frustrated with the result, the ideal is to reflect on how losing and winning elections is inherent to democracy. The danger, she says, is when people develop an aggressive and disrespectful attitude.

“Working through frustration under these conditions is much more difficult, because you can’t deal with that feeling from that place of non-reflection,” he says. “When you deal with absolute truths that have no echo in reality, what ends up happening is that this frustration is perpetuated, because it turns into indignation”, completes Guljor.

Psychologist Flávia Eugenio reinforces that feeling frustrated is normal, but that this cannot mean disrespect for others and for democracy.

“Feeling disappointed with collective processes is part of the political process. Being frustrated, not agreeing and going through a grieving process is to be expected and understandable, but this cannot be transformed into an attack and destruction of the other, as it flees from what is expected of healthy socialization”, he says.