This enemy of ours was a lion when it was openly enraged; now it’s a dragon when it catches in secret. (?) Because our parents needed patience to fight the lion, we need surveillance against the dragon. However, persecution, whether lion or dragon, never ceases for the Church; and it’s scariesr when he cheats than when he’s angry.
At that time, I wanted to force Christians to repudiate Christ; now teaches Christians to deny Christ; then coerce, now teach. He then introduced violence; now, insidious. Then he seemed furious, now he seems insinuating and hardly seems to be a mistake.
- 1.
- Left and right In view of the ongoing political debate.
- It is necessary to define what it is?And left ?.
- The left can be defined as that model of the political spectrum in which there is little or no personal and economic freedom.
- In which the State or party acquires a transcendent dimension.
- Acting to extend its dominance over all areas of society.
- The law promotes personal and economic freedom and the guarantee of individual rights.
- With limits on respect for the life.
- Property and freedom of others2.
- These terms acquired this meaning after the outbreak of the Cold War.
In Brazil, it was agreed to treat it as?No?the military regime, which took power in Brazil between 1964-1985, and how?groups that opposed the armed forces and wanted a socialist regime. Interestingly, both the military and the left share authoritarianism and interventionist developmentism. but, if the right assumes the assessment of the individual as absolute, how can this system degenerate into authoritarianism or totalitarianism ?, are there historical examples of authoritarian or totalitarian regimes that have affirmed individual freedom?Rather, it is left-wing regimes that have sought to firmly control (Gleichschaltung) all spheres of society (family, arts, sports, church, economics and the press), based on the notion of state/party significance. 3
Paul and Raphael Freston, in the article “Left or Right, Let’s Be Smart and Christian”4, quoting Norberto Bobbio, define the right as the political spectrum that “emphasizes the ideal of individual freedom. “However, before they wrote that? The examples? Much more numerous?Del? Right-wing authoritarianism ?. However, the suggestion or assertion that Nazism, fascism and military dictatorships in Latin America in the 60s and 80s represent the?Right? It is based on a contradiction between conceptual definition and historical reality. 5 The fact is that the cruellest dictators in 20th-century history were leftists: Lenin and Stalin (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), Adolf Hitler (Germany) and Walter Ulbricht (East Germany)), Nicolae Ceau?Escu (Romania), Pol-Pot (Cambodia), Mao Zedong (China) and H? Cho Minh City (Vietnam). Cuba, North Korea and Venezuela are now model states of leftism. 6
In these debates, the left is never compared with the right, the trap of the left discourse is to compare a “perfect” idea with reality, as if it were a proof of the superiority of the left, but intellectual honesty requires comparing socialism true. with true capitalism. In this case, the inferiority of the left is very open. Because, as Denis Rosenfield writes, should the comparison be made between capitalist [Western] and socialist [East Germany] Germany, or even between capitalist [South] Korea and North Korea]? The comparison is filtered by a “religious mentality”, “theological-political”, where the real law is compared with the idea of socialism, forged by those who attribute all the perfections to it.
This is equivalent to comparing a perfect society with an imperfect society, or even comparing man to God. It is clear that man, with his imperfections, will always lose in relation to God. The same fate would have the comparison between a perfect (ideal) and imperfect (real) society. (?) In other words, all perfections are attributed to socialism and, having these attributes, do we begin to check if they exist?capitalism. 7
Wolfhart Pannenberg reminds us that we must take into account that “the Antichrist manifests himself (?) Especially in the intra-world [utopian] doctrines of redemption and salvation, to which the people of modern societies are exposed. “In the eschatology of intra-world utopias, therefore, have the consequences of the functionalist exploitation of individuals (?) Have it been clarified, especially in the case of Marxism, that the happiness of the now alive is sacrificed unscrupulously in the name of the white call of humanity ?, in which only the individuals of the living generation of the time could participate?of this ‘secularized millennium’. And the contrast between this utopia and the hope taught by the Christian faith is clearly established:
In any intra-world schatology [such as Marxism], (of course) general consumption must be sought and affirmed at the expense of individuals [in what?Will individuals from past generations not participate in the future realization of their destiny?]. It is the anti-Christian structure of intra-world schatology. On the other hand, Christian eschatology retains the indissoluble link of humanity’s individual and general destiny. By the glorification of individuals by the hand of the glorification of the Father and the Son to them, the kingdom of God will be realized and not only consummated, but will also generally accept God’s justification for suffering. world. 8
Thus, contrary to what is proclaimed, left-wing and far-left parties do not have a democratic orientation, their proposals are inspired by the idea of the coercive state, judging and punishing, they do not recognize the dynamics of balance of segments of society and republican institutions, thus thinking they are easily corrupted by the idea that they are the “owners of the truth” and only the spokesmen of justice. 9
Indeed, institutional degeneration, persecution of journalists, and the use of violence and arbitrary arrests in an attempt to quell pro-democracy protests in Venezuela make the silence of sectors of the Brazilian press and left-wing government unworthy and complicit10. America, this devotion to leftism survives. Latin American nations have in fact become at the forefront of delay.
2. Liberalism and Democracy While the division between right and left has become a common place in postwar and Cold War political debates, today it only survives in American culture with more or less ideological coherence. And it must be remembered that America’s bipartisan system was a creation of the Founding Fathers, so that the system would block any political radicalism. Today, the system has been “short-circuited” in the United States, especially since God, who was important in the political thinking of the founders. parents, was pushed wistfully into the private sphere by the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties. 11
It seems that in European and Brazilian culture, it may make more sense to speak in terms of “liberal” and “antiliberal” . 12 From this paradigm, we can see that an anti-liberal mentality has its roots in the country, among elites. (colonels, families, conglomerates) and the government (whatever), which is characterized by protectionism, the directed and centralized economy, fierce hatred of privatization and the market, high tax rates, state pact and against the fundamental freedoms of individuals/concepts, traditionally, on the left. It is important to note that all governments since the proclamation of the republic in Brazil were anti-liberal and populist, a feature of politics in Latin America, in particular for Deodoro da Fonseca, Floriano Peixoto, Getlio Vargas, the military regime, Fernando Collor, Lula and Dilma Rousseff13.
This anti-liberal mentality also manifests itself in the state structure, the Brazilian state interferes and intervenes in all areas of society (family, arts, sports, church, economy and press), however, everything the state does has traditionally been marked by inefficiency. , incompetence and corruption. And, in a case of cognitive dissonance,?Ongueiros professionals, politicians and activists linked to left-wing and far-left parties such as PT, PSOL and PSTU say the country needs more state.
Liberalism, on the other hand, advocates for a less, lighter and effective state; Reduce state interference in the economy to the minimum necessary; Defend private property; Privatization of state-owned enterprises and public services that the private sector can offer; Free market and reduced public spending with a significant reduction in the tax burden. Just as it affirms respect for the rule of law and individual freedoms; Private initiative The different areas that make up society; and the promotion of intermediary organizations Are the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea, among others, more or less guided by liberal ideals?and the result is clearly visible. 14
3. ?Coca-Cola generation? Given these considerations, it is interesting to identify the reasons for the left-wing trend among young people, who appear to belong to the upper or upper middle class, study at state or federal universities, and receive government scholarships to (often) study abroad. For them, proletarians, because they live for work, ignore their state of slavery. And are they the members of this new class of new men?They will not only be able to enlighten, but guide the masses in the fight against oppression.
The world begins to be interpreted on the basis of a ‘new morals’, which opposes those who seek to ‘build a better world’ to the rigid mentality of society. Therefore, the world is divided into oppressors and oppressed, where all the good are oppressed, all who disagree are oppressors, and must be co-opted, silenced or eliminated. Social complexity comes down to a struggle between good and evil, a struggle between the people and the elites. It is not uncommon for workers to be treated as a “mass of others”, not to support them, labeled as people who do not want to change and who do not see ‘the struggle for change Curiously, during the Cold War in Poland and East Germany, these idealists were cynically called by the proletariat ‘bourgeois red’. The same revulsion is already evident here in Brazil, especially in the lowest strata of society. 15
It is urgent to study the links between the Black Blocs (masked in black and armed with bombs, Molotov cocktails, stones and sticks) with left-wing and far-left matches, such as the PSOL16. Who funds and guides the Black Blocs?Who gives you legal advice? The modus operandi of this militia is ancient, outdated, no different from fascist shock forces (Italy, 1920), The Nazis (Germany, 1930) and leftists (Germany, 1970-1998) present in the history of Europe in the twentieth century. 17 similarities with the coming of various guerrilla groups in Brazil during the dictatorship, such as the Revolutionary Navy Vanguarda Palmares (VAR-Palmares) 18 intolerance and hatred towards the main institutions that give meaning to a democracy , seen by them as a tyrannical bourgeois system19.
Hasn’t a condolence note appeared on the pages of these groups or parties?Or a reference to the death of tv director Santiago Andrade of TV Bandeirantes20, who wrote on the pages of the group suggested that tragedy was a mistake?Or defect status. Or they counterattacked with the memory of “everything the military police have ever done” as an example of “contraviolence. “It also reminds former guerrillas, who justified their violent actions with the term “retaliation”. 21 Therefore, the parties supporting the Black Blocs have no moral support to criticize the “Vigilantes”. in the District of Flamengo-RJ. 22 But in a country under constitutional status, is the law not equally valid for all?
Thus, it seems that the violence of the Black Blocs serves only the federal government of the PT, because, in addition to never displaying posters or cries of slogans against the failure of health and education, it empties the legitimate manifestations of its violence. the “million” marches fell to the thousands and eventually to the hundreds, as on the last few occasions.
I am increasingly amazed by the leadership of the Brazilian left, who, instead of seizing the opportunity to go through power and put into practice the ideals of education, awareness and spirit of community and work (brands of socialist promises), prefer to spread a spirit of rebellion, ignorance and demagoguery among young people. As Demetrio Magnoli points out, “Is there anything at the bottom of a country that is unable to see the face of evil, when it hides behind the mask of an ideology?24.
Some of these young associates on the left identify as Christians, but have more ties to paraeclesal groups than to local churches. These Christians who militate in left-wing and far-left parties and groups call themselves “progressive Christians” in Brazil. Curious, and revealing, the Polish Catholics who supported the Nazis before World War II, and the postwar communists also called themselves “progressive Christians. “
What it looks like is that the absence of the?Totally different?(Totaliter aliter) leads people to adopt an ideology that points to transcendence, and that supposedly helps them overcome the contradictions of an existentially oppressive society, satisfying the “supreme concern” of their lives, the dream of “another possible world. “”The “achievement of utopia”. 25 Therefore, a question is imposed on Christian preachers and communities: how to respond to this aspiration of something beyond and above creation, what do all people want?How can we satisfy this desire, to guide people? from idolatry to “deviant transcendence”, that is, to the state entity and ideology (right or left), to the worship of the Almighty God, the “totally other”, which is only revealed in the Holy Scriptures. Gospel the good news of God in Christ?dead for our sins and risen for our redemption, was offered with passion and dependence of the Holy Spirit?The God-Trinity is offered as the only one who can satisfy “supreme concern. “”that everyone is experiencing?
4. Won’t you have other gods before me? The left-wing anti-liberal mentality is binary: “we” and “them, the “good” and the “bad”, revolutionary and reactionary, left and right. Leftists can’t think in terms of gradations. 26So, if someone criticizes them, they have to come from the “right. “And the debate ends, because the left, to equal the confrontation, will start talking about the problems of the so-called right in Brazil?As if there were an organized right and a liberal policy and, typically, instead of arguing against arguments, the leftist will use the discourse of victimization or moral/spiritual restraint to escape the profound contradictions of his system, or resort to total defamation.
Only “Marxism,” as Richard Sturz wrote, “is nothing more than a heresy of Christianity. Instead of abolishing religion, Marxism became a secular religion. Are your teachings presented as substitutes for Christian doctrines?27. This transcendental rise of ideology and the inability to criticize itself reveals an idyllic loyalty on the left.
Christians, who seek to confess their faith by submitting to the scriptures, believe that there is only one Lord and King, the one Almighty God. Are Christians the subjects of the “Blessed and Sole Sovereign, the King of Kings, and the Lord of Lords”?(1 Tim 6:15). And are you waiting for the “homeland [which] is in heaven,” where you are waiting for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ?(Philippians 3:20), the only one who brings judgment and salvation to all society.
Christians do not share their loyalty with a state/party/government that demands religious fidelity, because Christians know that loyalty is idolatry, a violation of the first commandment. 28 So do Christians have freedom?That even the best unbelievers do not have it, any political system, any ideology, because they do so on the basis of the conviction that only the Lord God has the right to govern all spheres of society. No government or party has obtained this right. And Christians also believe that governments and parties that aspire to be total are no longer the one?God-ordained authority? (Romans 13:1-7), 29 to become? A beast?Who received his throne and his great authority? Dragon (Ap 13. 1-18). And in the face of this, the Christian response is: “Is it more important to obey God before men?”(AT 5. 29).
Christians must therefore resist authoritarianism and totalitarianism by all legitimate means, and to do so one has to ask: “If the Christian believes that God is the only absolute king and lord, he can abandon his loyalty to the party or to the authoritarian or totalitarian. The answer is no? It is incompatible for someone to declare that he worships God as the Lord who speaks only through his Word and becomes subservient to an unjust state, this implies that a Christian who submits to such a state puts himself in a position contrary to the scriptures, simply becoming “the sacred footman of government”.
They are usually, but not exclusively, liberal theologians who support leftism, and are those who reject Sacred Scripture as the only Word of God to be heard, and also undermine the glory and majesty of God, as is the case in open theism and the theologies of liberation. For them, “the alternative is to believe in a god who has the name, but not the qualities of God revealed in the scriptures, and who is but a mere capitation to Marxism. “There is no interest in the fate of the real. concrete and concrete person, but only in the emancipation of the oppressed, alienated and proletariat class32.
There is a conscious effort to co-opt everything necessary to respect this attempt to merge leftism with a revision of the Christian faith. Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s legacy is an example of this partnership in the service of Marxism. Bonhoeffer’s wing interpretation is his example of resistance to Nazism and some phrases from his correspondence, resistance and submission. But there is no concern in putting the German martyr in context. rapprochement between Christians and leftists, or as a precursor to the theology of liberation?
In an appendix to his doctoral thesis, written in 1927, Bonhoeffer addressed the question of the Church and the proletariat. 34 He affirms the need for the German Evangelical Church to preach the gospel to the proletariat, who live in poverty and isolation. It will happen when the Church stopped addressing only the bourgeoisie, which enjoyed security, orderly family relationships and a relative culture; If the Church did not announce the Gospel to the proletariat, it would be seduced by the socialists. For the German theologian, the question was the exclusivity of the Gospel, God in judgment and in grace. As he concludes, the Gospel cannot be confused with socialism, and it will not be because of this ideology that the Kingdom of God will come to earth, which will only be consumed by the Gospel.
Therefore, the goal of leftists is to adapt a revision of the Christian faith to an ideology totally opposite to it, hence the theological hatred (odium theologicum) that liberal theologians have for the reformed faith. of scripture authority, predestination, and covenant are the real motivations for large-scale political revolutions, such as the English and American revolutions, in the 17th and 18th centuries.
In the face of the facts, there are those who appeal to the emotional argument that an anti-leftist position is “insensitive,” “brazen. “and “crazy. ” It is worth remembering: do Christians do “good for all”, and “especially for the faithful?”(Gal 6:7-10), constrained by love and fidelity to Jesus Christ; they don’t externalize their love to give to the state. In Acts 2: 41-47, such a passage to the liking of this mentality, do the early Christians share what they did not restrict by the state or by the emperor?but they do so freely out of love for the Lord God and others.
5. Don’t you give up your trust? Helmuth James Graf von Moltke was arrested in January 1944 for being part of the German resistance against the National Socialist Party and, taken to court, engaged in the following dialogue with the executioner, shortly before his death on 23 January 1945:
During his speeches, [Judge Roland] Freisler told me: “National Socialism only resembles Christianity in one respect: we demand the whole of man. “I don’t know if the others sitting there could understand what was being said, because that was the kind of dialogue between Freisler and me. an implicit dialogue, since I haven’t had a chance to say much?a dialogue through which we know each other fully. Was Freisler the only one in the group who fully understood me and the only one who understood why he had to kill me?In my case, everything was determined in the most severe way. “Who are you in charge of, the other world or Adolf Hitler?”Where do you put your loyalty and faith?
Isn’t this issue also linked to the struggle between fidelity to the left (as well as any other position on the political spectrum) and the exclusive worship of the God of the Trinity, the only true ruler and king?
The decisive phrase in the process was: “Herr Condé, Christianity and the National Socialists have only one thing in common; one thing: do we claim the whole man?I was wondering if I really understood what I said there. (?)
Have I maintained my position (?) Not as a Protestant, not as a landowner, not as a nobleman, not as a Prussian, not even as a German?None of this, have I maintained my Christian position and nothing else?35
May God help us to attain that steadfastness, at the expense of our own lives, if necessary, because God does not tolerate the worship of other beings or beings, only God, the Almighty Lord, whose signs of his kingdom are already present through the risen Jesus Christ, is worthy of all worship, devotion, and glory.
_____________________________ 1Santo Agostinho, Comentário aos Salmos, 39,1 (São Paulo: Paulus, 1997), p. 635-636. 2Para esta conceituação e bibliografia, cf. Franklin Ferreira, Curso Vida Nova de teologia básica: Teologia sistemática (São Paulo: Edições Vida Nova, 2013), p. 210-212. Neste livro também estabelece-se uma diferenciação entre a posição fundamentalista evangélica de rejeição do espaço público e o desenvolvimento de uma compreensão reformada, que entende Deus como o senhor absoluto de toda a realidade (p. 212-218). 3Para o significado de autoritarismo, cf. Norberto Bobbio; Nicola Matteucci; Gianfranco Paquino, Dicionário de política (Brasília: UnB, 1986), p. 94-104. Para uma conceituação de totalitarismo, exemplificado na Alemanha nazista e na União Soviética comunista, cf. Hannah Arendt, Origens do totalitarismo (São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1989), p. 339-531. 4Publicado na revista Ultimato, nº 346. Para uma análise deste texto, cf. Jonas Madureira, Tolerância: a atitude própria de toda alma robusta, http://www.teologiabrasileira.com.br/teologiadet.asp?codigo=366. 5Rotular o Partido Nacional-Socialista Alemão (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiters Partei) como ?extrema direita? é somente a repetição de um cliché comum que, admito, é muito popular, mas não se coaduna com a realidade. Os líderes do Partido Nazista se viam como legítimos socialistas, desprezando a aristocracia, o livre mercado, o capitalismo e a democracia liberal, abolindo a liberdade de imprensa, praticando a censura e apregoando uma teoria política com suposta fundamentação científica. E a sociedade alemã foi organizada pelos nazistas sob o efeito coercitivo da ?camaradagem? como forma de grupamento social, onde ?pensar, sentir e agir em categorias de condução de vida individual e de responsabilidade pessoal estava dissociado do ditame de uma moral que somente permitia o que estava a serviço? da sociedade. O alvo do ditador era a ?construção do Estado social do povo?, um ?Estado social? exemplar, no qual ?as barreiras (sociais) seriam progressivamente derrubadas?. Entre 1925 e 1929 os comunistas estalinistas ajudaram as forças armadas alemãs a se rearmarem ? o que era proibido pelo Tratado de Versalhes ?, e o treinamento da força aérea e das forças blindadas alemãs se deu em território soviético. Em 1934 havia moedas nazistas cunhadas com a foice e o martelo (basta uma procura no Google Imagens, por ?Tag Der Arbeit?). E, no começo da Segunda Guerra, nazistas e comunistas tinham um pacto de não-agressão. Inclusive, duas semanas após a invasão alemã da Polônia, os soviéticos a invadiram, pois a partilha daquele país era parte do pacto de não agressão teuto-soviético. No conjunto, os dois totalitarismos foram responsáveis por alguns dos maiores genocídios da história, como o Holocausto judeu (Shoah) efetuado pelos nazistas, e o genocídio ucraniano (Holodomor), perpetrado por Stalin. Portanto, em última instância, tanto o comunismo como o nazismo são socialismos, sendo o primeiro um socialismo de classe e internacional, e o segundo um socialismo étnico e nacionalista. E só houve guerra entre os dois totalitarismos porque a extrema-esquerda tem caráter autofágico, multiplicando as dissensões internas quando as externas arrefecem ? como ocorreu com Stalin, por exemplo, que com medo de traição mandou matar cerca de um milhão de líderes do partido e do alto comando das forças armadas no Grande Expurgo, entre 1934-1940. Curiosamente, na atualidade, o neonazismo ressurge nas cidades da antiga Alemanha Oriental comunista. Para uma introdução a esta classificação do nazismo e comunismo, cf. Alain Besançon, A infelicidade do século (São Paulo: Bertrand Brasil, 2000). Cf. também Sönke Neitzel e Harald Welzer, Soldados: sobre lutar, matar e morrer (São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2014), p. 41-45, 49-81. 6Chega-se a uma cifra de 85 a 100 milhões de mortos por comunistas no século XX. Cf. Stephanie Courtois (org.), O livro negro do comunismo (Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 1999). Aos nazistas são atribuídos cerca de 20 milhões de mortos. 7Denis Lerrer Rosenfield, ?O embuste ideológico?, em O Globo: http://oglobo.globo.com/opiniao/o-embuste-ideologico-11167368. Agradeço a Rodrigo Majewski, professor do Instituto Bíblico Esperança, em Porto Alegre-RS, por me chamar a atenção a este ponto. 8Wolfhart Pannenberg, Teologia Sistemática. vol. 3 (Santo André: Academia Cristã & São Paulo: Paulus, 2009), p. 767, 828. 9Ainda assim, deve-se tomar cuidado em não se cair no dualismo esquerdista (ver tópico IV abaixo) e supor que não há inteligência e/ou honestidade na centro-esquerda. Parafraseando Rodrigo Constantino, reconheço na socialdemocracia uma esquerda legítima, da qual se pode discordar com respeito e abertura ao diálogo. Mas, curiosamente, quando na presidência da república brasileira, esta socialdemocracia foi rotulada de ?conservadora?, ?direitista? e ?neoliberal? por partidos de esquerda e extrema-esquerda. 10Em 6 de março de 2014 quatro ex-presidentes da América Latina condenaram a repressão na Venezuela: http://brasil.elpais.com/brasil/2014/03/06/internacional/1394125471_182731.html. Os autores da declaração conjunta foram Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Oscar Arias Sánches, Ricardo Lagos e Alejandro Toledo. Cf. o depoimento de Renato Vargens, ?Relato daquilo que eu vi na Venezuela de Nicolás Maduro?, em http://renatovargens.blogspot.com.br/2014/04/coisas-que-eu-vi-na-venezuela.html. 11Ainda que a fé de quase todos os Pais Fundadores fosse deísta, a crença na divindade desempenhava papel vital na interpretação da Declaração de Independência e, especialmente, da Constituição dos Estados Unidos. Cf. David Holmes, The Faiths of the Founding Fathers (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006). Outra razão para a crise do bipartidarismo seria a ingerência política do FED sobre os partidos políticos dos Estados Unidos. 12Sobre essa conceituação, cf. a entrevista no programa ?Painel?, da Globo News, com Luiz Felipe Pondé, Reinaldo Azevedo e Bolívar Lamounier, sob a mediação de William Waack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwEUK8_E60k. 13De acordo com Marco Antônio Villa, há no Brasil ?uma tradição antidemocrática solidamente enraizada e que nasceu com o positivismo, no final do Império. O desprezo pela democracia foi um espectro que rondou o nosso país durante cem anos de república. Tanto os setores conservadores como os chamados progressistas transformaram a democracia em um obstáculo à solução dos grandes problemas nacionais, especialmente nos momentos de crise política?. ?Ditadura à brasileira?, Folha de São Paulo Opinião, 5 de março de 2009, em: http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/opiniao/fz0503200908.htm. Cf. também Nelson Paes Leme, ?Os donos do poder?, em http://oglobo.globo.com/opiniao/os-donos-do-poder-12305436. 14Segundo o Democracy index 2012 produzido pela revista The Economist, o Brasil está em 44º no ranking da democracia, com as seguintes avaliações: geral: 7.12; processo eleitoral e pluralidade: 9.58; governança: 7.50; participação política: 5.00; cultura política: 4.38; liberdades civis: 9.12. Os países ranqueados até o 25º lugar são considerados ?democracias completas?; do 26º até o 79º, ?democracias falhas?; do 80º até o 116º, ?regimes híbridos?; do 117º até o 167º, ?regimes autoritários?. A Venezuela está em 95º, como um regime híbrido, com avaliação geral de 5.15 e Cuba está em 127º, um regime autoritário com avaliação geral em 3.52. Deve-se destacar que desde 2006 tanto as avaliações do Brasil como da Venezuela caíram. Cf. Democracy index 2012: Democracy at a standstill ? A report from The Economist Intelligence Unit, em: http://pages.eiu.com/rs/eiu2/images/Democracy-Index-2012.pdf. 15um exemplo sintomático: ?Sininho?, a jovem ativista do grupo dos Black Blocs, foi insultada na rua como ?patricinha hipócrita? por passageiros de ônibus. Cf. http://oglobo.globo.com/rio/sininho-chamada-de-patricinha-hipocrita-ao-deixar-delegacia-11573691. 16O PSOL é um partido de extrema-esquerda, que tem entre seus fundadores um terrorista italiano (Achille Lollo) e que lutou para dar asilo a outro terrorista italiano (Cesare Battisti). 17Para aludir à famosa frase de Karl Marx em O 18 brumário de Luís Bonaparte, ?a história se repete, primeiro como tragédia, depois como farsa?, recomendo o filme O Grupo Baader Meinhof (2008), que conta a história do grupo de extrema-esquerda Fração do Exército Vermelho (RAF). 18O ex-militante de esquerda Augusto de Franco comentou que havia a tática de provocar a polícia para obter respostas violentas e, assim, desacreditar as instituições responsáveis pela ordem. Cf. http://globotv.globo.com/globo-news/entre-aspas/v/entre-aspas-discute-a-atuacao-dos-black-blocs-na-morte-do-cinegrafista-santiago-andrade/3147060. 19Cf. Merval Pereira, ?O futuro da democracia?, em O Globo: http://oglobo.globo.com/pais/noblat/post.asp?blogadmin=true&cod_post=526563&ch=n: ?Segundo a Freedom House, um centro de estudos nos Estados Unidos dedicado à análise da liberdade no mundo, 2013 foi o oitavo ano seguido em que a liberdade global declinou?. 20Como jornalistas da TV Globo atribuíram a morte do cinegrafista inicialmente à Policia Militar, Alon Feuerwerker considerou 7 de fevereiro de 2014 como ?o dia em que a TV russa salvou o jornalismo brasileiro?, por causa das imagens da agência de notícias russa Ruptly, que foram fundamentais para descobrir que o artefato que vitimou Santiago Andrade foi lançado por Black Blocs. 21VAR-Palmares chegou a planejar a execução (ou, em linguagem revolucionária, ?justiçamento?) de militares. Cf. http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/nacional,var-palmares-planejou-execucao-de-militares,705934,0.htm?p=1. Ex-militantes, como Fernando Gabeira, confessam que os programas de seus grupos realmente incluíam a ?ditadura do proletariado? no Brasil. Cf. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VtXhnxWHC0. Cf. também Marco Antonio Villa, sobre o conturbado período da ditadura: http://www.estadao.com.br/noticias/impresso,golpe-a-brasileira,1131917,0.htm. 22f. http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/cotidiano/2014/02/1407239-adolescente-e-agredido-a-pauladas-e-acorrentado-nu-a-poste-na-zona-sul-do-rio.shtml. 23Tal procedimento ilustra um uso ideologicamente contaminado dos direitos humanos. Cf. Ruy Fabiano, ?Direitos humanos seletivos?, O Globo, http://oglobo.globo.com/pais/noblat/posts/2014/02/15/direitos-humanos-seletivos-524517.asp. 24Demétrio Magnoli, ?Causa mortis?, O Globo, http://oglobo.globo.com/pais/noblat/posts/2014/02/13/causa-mortis-524204.asp. 25Outro elemento que vale a pena ser destacado é a culpa difusa que esses jovens de família abastada provavelmente sentem pela desigualdade, uma culpa que recebe nome e solução nas ideologias de esquerda. Cf. Norma Braga Venâncio em A mente de Cristo: conversão e cosmovisão cristã (São Paulo: Vida Nova, 2012), p. 179-181. 26Cf. John M. Ellis, em Literature Lost (New Haven & Londres: Yale University Press, 1997), que analisou o fenômeno chamado por ele de ?lógica do tudo-ou-nada? (all or nothing logic) no campo das ciências literárias nas universidades americanas, tomadas pelo pensamento de esquerda. 27Richard J. Sturz, ?O marxismo e a fé cristã?, em Colin Brown, Filosofia e fé cristã (São Paulo: Vida Nova, 2007), p. 274. 28Karl Barth, ?O primeiro mandamento como axioma teológico?, em Walter Altmann (org.), Karl Barth: Dádiva & louvor; artigos selecionados (São Leopoldo: IEPG & Sinodal, 1996), p. 127-139. 29 Para a teologia anti-imperial de Paulo, cf. N. T. Wright, Paulo: novas perspectivas (São Paulo: Loyola 2009), p. 83-106. 30Cf. Eberhard Busch, ?Igreja e política na tradição reformada?, em: Donald McKim (ed.), Grandes temas da tradição reformada, p. 160-175. A questão de fundo aqui é a legitimidade do Estado. A comunidade cristã honra o Estado quando este é legítimo, inclusive servindo-o, mas resiste-o quando se torna não-legítimo. Para tal, é necessário distinguir entre ordem e arbítrio, democracia e tirania, liberdade e anarquia, etc. Cf. Karl Barth, ?Comunidade cristã e comunidade civil?, p. 289-315. 31Richard J. Sturz, ?O marxismo e a fé cristã?, p. 277. 32Richard J. Sturz, ?O marxismo e a fé cristã?, p. 268-271. 33Isso ocorre tipicamente nos cursos de graduação em teologia, ao tratar de teologia contemporânea; ensinam-se alguns temas da teologia de Barth e Bonhoeffer, por exemplo, mas há pouco ou nenhum esforço de inseri-los no contexto intelectual, político ou social da Europa ocidental das décadas de 1910 a 1940. Cf. especialmente Dean G. Stroud (ed.), Preaching in Hitler?s Shadow: Sermons of Resistance in the Third Reich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2013), p. 3-48. 34Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Sociologia de la Iglesia: Sanctorum Communio (Salamanca: Ediciones Sígueme, 1969), p. 248-251. Para um exemplo de resistência ao totalitarismo cubano, baseado em Bonhoeffer, cf. a história do pastor batista Mario Felix Lleonart Barroso, autor do blog cubanoconfesante.com, em ?Cuba Case Study: Bonhoeffer-Inspired Pastor Arrested After Blogs, Tweets, and D.C. Trip?: http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2014/january/cuba-case-study-pastor-mario-lleonart-arrested-csw.html. 35Cf. Michael Haykin, Palavras de amor (São José dos Campos: Fiel, 2011), p. 139-140. Este trecho é de uma carta escrita da prisão de Tegel para sua esposa, Freya, em 11 de janeiro de 1945. Moltke era luterano, e membro do Círculo de Kreisau, de resistência não violenta ao nazismo, mas foi executado na prisão de Plötzensee, em Berlim, na esteira do fracasso da Operação Valquíria.