We are 190 million suspects in Brazil. It is not solidarity, compassion, cordiality, not even insecurity: the feeling that unites us most is mistrust. Is it possible to build a Nation with this level of distrust?
A global survey by the Ipsos Institute points out Brazil as the nation with the highest degree of distrust in the world: only 11% say they trust others. The average among the 30 countries surveyed is 30%. China, in turn, appears in first place, with almost 60% of the population saying they feel this mutual trust, followed by the Netherlands, Sweden and Australia.
Brazilian distrust was honed over time, and to disarm it it will be necessary to understand some of its motivations.
There are reasons for distrust in public affairs. The policy — with exceptions — is not delivering access to quality services or quality of life for people.
The vast majority of the Brazilian population has been living a hard life for many years. It is possible to reverse this situation, but it is necessary to have a degree of radicalism, where concessions are not made in the face of issues that give dignity to the population such as health, education, housing, mobility and sanitation.
If the Executive only thinks about maintaining power, in Congress it is no different, dominated by groups that work for their own and private interests, but not public ones. The not-so-transparent amendments by the rapporteur are an example of the interplay of interests established there, while recent party changes show the supremacy of immediate interest at the expense of commitment to party programs. Can it be trusted?
The Judiciary, in many cases, defends more powerful interests and groups and with maneuvers that do not dignify it. An example is the request for views by Minister Mendonça of the STF in relation to the demarcation of indigenous lands by the time frame, which raises doubts as to the interests he defends. How to trust the impartiality of the judiciary?
A survey released in January by the Sustainable Cities Institute illustrates the distrust of São Paulo residents towards institutions. 28% of respondents said that none of them contributes to their quality of life. In the case of the São Paulo City Council, only 3% of the population sees positive effects in its performance. In relation to the municipal executive, the negative perception reached 45% of the interviewees. Almost half of the population also stated that the city hall is little, or not at all, transparent in relation to public data.
In relation to companies, there is also a lot of distrust, justified by the prioritization of their interests at the expense of the public: the recent lobby for the release of pesticides, not caring about the impact on people’s health, is an example of this. Even more recently, the federal government sanctioned a decree with a reduction of up to 25% in the IPI on vehicles and household appliances, which was not passed on by companies to consumers. There is also a breach of trust here.
The huge inequality in Brazil is another factor of social discomfort, which separates us and generates crooked eyes. Layer by layer, we created a shell of distrust that separates us and makes it difficult to develop a common dream.
The sum of public and private distrust results in a difficult combo to be faced. Recovery involves deliveries, fulfillment of promises and, above all, the prevalence of the common interest over the private one.
Building trust has to do with belonging, care, empathy, commitment, among other feelings. Although in Brazil we have burned the bridges that bring us together, there is still time to reverse this situation. It remains to encourage trust in people, before distrust.
The creation of a favorable and reliable environment is the basis for the advancement of society and business. Companies have a responsibility in this process: to go beyond short-term interests. In politics, one way is to create spaces for participation that bring politics closer to society. Another points to this year’s elections, which are configured as yet another opportunity for transformation.
Even if it is difficult to trust, the political path is fundamental to face the challenges we have. It is up to each of us to identify our trusted names. They exist, believe me. But to find them, we have to be willing to research, listen and critically evaluate them. It will be through the improvement of democracy that we will regain lost trust.
