Um diário do governo interino

About this book

There are moments in the history of a country that become emblematic in determining its future and position in the world. Natural catastrophic events, scheduled events that drive the economy, and political events are explicit examples of social change. The mobilization that occurs in exceptional cases ends up moving social routines, even if part of the population is not directly involved or not involved. Thus, in these times, new themes appear on the public agenda, creating emotional environments in the country, often steeped in feelings provoked by daily news that subtly favor sides, establish rites, dictate norms. Emotion in Brazil and with Brazilians has provoked a historical division between supporters of opposing sides, attributing different meanings to the colors of the national flag, to domestic utensils, to party flags. The sacralization and demonization of politics in the daily agenda of newspapers is present in the daily agenda of small and large newspapers. In fiction, politics is illustrated by various film series in which villains articulate the seizure of power, scandals are selected for disclosure, public opinion is shaped according to the news, heroes built, heroes destroyed. Would reality be different from what we see in fiction? Politics by itself is the art of negotiation. It is to bring together groups that think differently, to debate issues that matter to people, to seek solutions. The question is: do you negotiate including groups or excluding? Do you negotiate on the basis of argument and lawful issues, or do you negotiate on the basis of bargaining or circumventing legality? Thought-provoking and reflective, "Um diário do governo interino" brings the reader in frank, critical and informative language a perspective of what were historical days for Brazil in 2016. Dr. Eneida Desiree Salgado offers a must read for anyone who wants to understand the moment from arguments, forming the basis of criticality including groups or excluding? Do you negotiate on the basis of argument and lawful issues, or do you negotiate on the basis of bargaining or circumventing legality?