The Great Allotment

por The Winners

Among the only ten countries with areas larger than two million square kilometers, Brazil is the five-time world champion of the “greenness”: Brazil produces food in only 7.8% of its territory, supplying 210 million Brazilians; the country generates surpluses which are turning it into the biggest agricultural and farming producer and exporter in the world!

This is the reason why Brazil suffers intense and driven world defamatory campaign, promoted by competitor countries, and reverberated by NGOs directed by financially engaged Brazilians.

Many Brazilians of good faith, unaware of the national reality, became useful innocents, believing in what propagate the American maize producers, which, in eager for billions of dollars in additional markets, determine to their affiliates to finance Brazilian NGOs. It is staggering to realize that these institutions are also financed by the national government.

The document “Farms Here, Forests There” exposes the conflict of the American agricultural producers with the steadfastly growing development of Brazilian agriculture. To justify the title of this article, I searched for some compilated numbers by Embrapa (acronym for Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation), through the researcher Evaristo Eduardo de Miranda: The protected areas occupy 30.4% of the national territory, equivalent in surface to fifteen countries of Europe; 10% of the country’s area is occupied by settlements; Added to these, areas of “Terrabras” (via Incra – National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform –, Funai – National Indian Foundation –, among others) reach around 20%; Areas attributed by the Union to indians, quilombolas and others totalize 37% of the territory; and To the preservation areas, the impressive figure of 25.6% of national soil.

Totalizing, 92.2% of Brazil is destined and deeded, as verified above.

It is, therefore, the greatest allotment of History. For agricultural and farming production, only 7.8% of Brazilian soil is left. For comparison: The United States preserve only 20% of its area; the majoritarian 80% is destined to agribusiness and other utilities. From this false unbalance created in Brasilia, was generated a world perception that we irresponsibly deforest; that we do not protect our green areas; this feeds movements like “Farms Here, Forests There”, which, besides failing to be true, agitating the spurious green flag, aims to oblige us not to participate, as supplier, of the future growing of food consumption.

Certainly, in this new political cycle, it is time to speak and act, as government and private initiative, in defense of the future of our country, currently tied up in outdated concepts. Conceptualizations, amazingly, I repeat, defended in a vigorous manner by thousands of NGOs funded by American maize producers and other foods of varying nationalities, threatened by our farmers’ productivity potential.

In this same line, also follows the national development project, requiring a drastic correction of directions as the numbers below demonstrate the best. In 1981 I led the first delegation of entrepreneurs and journalists to China. Believing in Deng Xiaoping’s Development Plan (“It does not matter the color of the cat, the important is that it kills rats…”), I founded the first office of a private Brazilian company in Beijing. I studied South Korea and Japan: I observed the opening of their economies to the world, regardless of the ideological accents of their suppliers of raw materials and customers of manufactured goods.

I focused on the models of social, economic and human progress applicable to Brazil. In these countries, I observed that the result of these policies were due from the priority investments in education and technology, underpinning a strong industrial impulse towards exports; they were not constrained by the reception of methods and production systems from more advanced countries, with an emphasis on efficiency and productivity, even exposing themselves to international competition in their own territories.

At the time, Brazil was the seventh-from-the-top economy in the world. China was under Brazil, despite being among the top 25 – with a very low per capita income. Ours was equivalent to 17% of the American income. Brazil accounted for 45% of United States` per capita income. By 2016 South Korea has reached 70% of the American per capita income, and has matched that of the European Union. And our Brazil, in the same year, regressed to only 25% of the American per capita income – information extracted from the exquisite article by Affonso Celso Pastore, who indicated irrefutable figures that impose themselves.

I have always been worried that we are walking backwards like stubborn crabs, wasting time in sterile discussions about which model is proper to national development. Our great president Juscelino Kubistchek taught us when he made public policy the goal of his government: “To make fifty years in five”, creating the “Made In Brazil” industry. Thus, the model exists! I indicate the examples of the three beforementioned Asian countries, despite the disparate ideological political regimes.

Brazilian society shakes, screams and rages, demanding that the paths of progress are opened to us through education, health and honest administrations; calls for the integration of the country as a whole; by the opening to the world, breaking the registries and privileges that restrained the productivity jump of our industry. Oxygenated, there will be jobs for everyone, starting with the inclusion of the 12 million unemployed to the productive force.

We will reach our Democracy, the authentic one!

You may also like

Deixe um Comentário