The invasion of the United States Congress on January 6, 2021 was an attempted coup d’état with the participation of then-President Donald Trump, said the committee that investigates the episode in Parliament. But for civil society organizations that came together to stand up to the Republican, “coup” was a forbidden word.
Who counts is Michael Podhorzer, a political organizer known behind the scenes in Washington and who works with the AFL-CIO, the largest union federation in the USA. He is considered one of those responsible for articulating movements by unions, civil rights organizations and community councils to resist Trump’s initiatives to try to reverse the 2020 election lost to Joe Biden – a scenario pointed out as similar to that of Brazil today and the attacks on the country. electoral system by Jair Bolsonaro (PL) and relevant portions of his supporters.
The first proposal of the Americans was precisely not to put crowds in the streets with posters saying “there will be no coup”. The left, to some extent, was prepared for this, after the mass anti-racist acts that took to the streets of different cities months before, in protest against the murder of George Floyd, a black man who was asphyxiated in the approach of a white police officer in Minnesota.
“A lot of people from organized civil society wanted to go out to protest or react in some way. The most important thing we did was make sure that didn’t happen,” says Podhorzer.
It is an unintuitive reasoning, but, in the view of the veteran organizer, reacting to Trump’s provocations would be a sign of a lack of confidence in the American electoral process itself. “We were sure that the transfer of power would happen, as it did, and we needed to show confidence that Biden would be sworn in,” he says.
“Putting a crowd on the streets would turn the case into a left versus right dispute.” According to the political activist, in this scenario there would still be the risk of the then president mobilizing security forces against the protesters, claiming to seek “the pacification of the country”.
So, according to him, it was possible to force some normalcy — “no matter how crazy Trump was talking.” Says Podhorzer, “One thing dictator-inclined people count on is reaction. If people don’t react, they basically say, ‘You lost and you know you lost.’ They practically laugh at someone who thinks they’re too powerful.”
The decision to avoid the streets was confirmed after a video call meeting between activists from different areas hours after the Capitol invasion, in one of the most tense moments in recent American history. Strategies, however, had been in the works for months, ever since Trump began attacking the country’s electoral system.
The then president indicated that he would refuse to grant victory to the democratic opponent, as he did, and repeated, as he still does, that there were frauds and that he was the real one when the country went to the polls. The American justice never found any evidence of this.
Avoiding the use of the word “coup” also came in a strategy to avoid aggressive words in the ears of people from other political spheres, who had been bothered by the police’s requests for an end after the death of George Floyd.
Podhorzer says, however, that it was only possible to “ignore” Trump given the high level of trust Americans have in their institutions – which he says he does not know if it is possible to transpose to Brazil in the event of political turmoil after the presidential elections in October. .
There was no fear, for example, that high-ranking military personnel would side with Trump; in Brazil, part of the highest echelon of the Armed Forces indicates having bought Bolsonaro’s arguments that electronic voting machines are not safe. “The Divider: Trump in the White House”, a book about to be released in the US, tells that the then president was deeply frustrated with his military leaders, whom he considered insufficiently loyal and obedient.
Figures such as General Mark A. Milley, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acted within the government to ensure that the military acted as a bulwark against an increasingly out-of-control president, according to the work.
Another key factor in the success in silently resisting an attempt by Trump to steal the election was business support for maintaining order in the country, according to Podhorzer. “That’s what I think can be most dangerous in Brazil,” he says, referring to Bolsonaro’s support in part of the market.
In the US, the rare alliance between unions and business became public on election night, when the AFL-CIO released a joint statement with the American Chamber of Commerce — the largest business lobby group in the country — and other institutions, asking for respect. to the vote count. In November, Trump even appealed to the Supreme Court to stop counting in Pennsylvania and used the phrase “Stop counting!”
“It is imperative that electoral authorities be given space and time to count each vote in accordance with applicable laws,” the text read. With due proportions, a little in line with recent letters in defense of the rule of law in Brazil.
Shy, this was one of the few public manifestations in the sector. Behind the scenes, however, the movement was much more intense, and CEOs of large companies began to send messages to Trump that they would not support him if he carried out a coup.
For those involved in the articulations at the time, the fact that this took place privately, not in public, would have convinced the republican that the demonstrations were serious. The messages would have been passed on by emissaries, especially lawyers with good traffic between important names in the party.
A year after the intense political articulation that decided to “do nothing” – at least not in public – Podhorzer sees success in the operation, as Trump failed to steal the election. But he says he has doubts about the possibility of reproducing the strategy in Brazil, should Bolsonaro supporters decide to cause disturbances in the country after his eventual defeat to Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT).
He argues that both Trump and Bolsonaro will not be automatically forgotten from the public sphere. “In the US, Trump represents a much deeper change that has been happening for at least 15 years in society,” he says, referring to the increase in anguish and resentment with the political class, especially after the 2008 crisis, and to radicalization.
“These things don’t exist because of Trump. On the contrary, Trump is a product of that. That’s why there are many Trumps in government structures in the interior of the country,” he adds, without naming figures who follow an even more aggressive line than the of the former president, such as California Governor Ron DeSantis. “It won’t go away overnight.”
