so i’d like to discuss the largest culture war element of bolsonaro’s platform, which is fighting left-wing political indoctrination in schools. i think this rightly raises concerns, as “teach the controversy” initiatives, which is essentially the content of the existing bill in question, often have the intent to bring in nakedly ideological and/or academically illegitimate content to the curriculum.

what i’m here to say is that blantant left-wing indoctrination is a real thing in brazilian schools, and that you should not project e.g. the american system in your judgment of this particular initiative.

honestly, it’s really, really bad.

for instance, here is a picture from a school textbook officially recommended by the ministry of education, and the history book most often used in public schools:

the book is effusively positive about socialist cuba, che guevara, mao, the farcs in colombia, and about socialism in general, and systematically critical of capitalism. one question literally asks, i shit you not, “should the torturers and murderers from the previous regime be shot or merely imprisoned after a revolution”?

the page on neoliberalism asks in a sidebar, “The meaning of life: love yourself and consume? Is that our future?” and includes the following picture:

that says, man, i’m glad my country isn’t socialist. if it were, i wouldn’t be free to purchase an imported automobile. again: this book is officially recommended by the federal government.

it is also not an exception, by any means. while i never encountered this particular text (i would’ve been too old for it anyway), this bias describes my own experience with brazilian education, along with that of literally everyone else i’ve discussed this with. 

the essay portions of entry exams to all the major and most prestigious universities always have a socially-relevant topic, which almost always favor a lefty perspective. though you can nominally argue a dissenting position, the questions tend to make it harder–in a recent essay about hate speech vs freedom of speech, of the 8 supporting texts you’re supposed to base your essay on, one was pro unfettered free speech, two were neutral/ambivalent, and five were for limiting speech.

also, you risk getting graded more harshly for taking the non-lefty position–i remember a teacher who worked as a grader being told he couldn’t mark a student down for his ideological position (ok) in the context that he really wanted to. in the country’s biggest general exam (similar to the sat), “disrespecting human rights” takes 20% off your score (it used to be 100%). there is no detailed explanation of what constitutes disrespecting human rights, so good luck navigating that minefield.

on another tack, i personally heard, not looking for it, from three separate parents whose very young children (like 5 or 6) were told by a teacher at school that bolsonaro is an evil man, and one girl who is around twelve (and, incidentally, black) who was told that bolsonaro was going to kill all the black people in brazil.

okay, but isn’t the right also angling for censorship? you may have read that a congresswoman, ana caroline campagnolo, created a channel for students to upload video and audio of teachers and professors preaching politics in the classroom (which, by the way, she was quickly ordered to shut down and slapped with a R$70k fine).

i get the issue of potential intimidation of teachers and professors. but let’s take a look at ana’s story, shall we? in her master’s program in history at a public university, ana clashed with one professor in particular. she tells the story in this video. here are the main points:

• the professor sent her multiple emails regarding private posts on her facebook (forwarded by fellow students) with antifeminist content, telling her that her views were not compatible with the program and urging her to “reconsider” her position; ana, concerned about her standing in the program, eventually deleted the posts
• the professor went on a rant directed at ana during class (of which there is audio, and an abridged version in the linked video), saying that “we in this program” believe in feminism and communism, suggesting that ana find another university more ideologically compatible with her views; the other students joined in, one saying ana’s conservative logic is “oppressive”, a statement endorsed by the professor
• ana (who is a christian) was assigned a report on a book about how the christian church has been misogynistic from its roots (an assignment which did not allow for a critical approach to the book’s claims)
• the professor was ana’s thesis adviser because ana was interested in the history of feminism; the professor, supposing the conclusion would be anti-feminist, insisted she commit to a feminist conclusion before approving the topic; the professor eventually dropped ana as an advisee, effectively closing this avenue of research for ana, specifically citing as the reason, in an official document to the university, videos ana posted on social media.
• ana eventually sued the professor, who, in her defense documents, called ana “racist, homophobic, sexist and prejudiced.” the students and relevant union stood by the professor.

i have no reason to believe ana is an exception, especially given how the institution and union seem not to have batted an eye at this professor’s treatment of her. so while on one hand you have the potential intimidation of teachers and professors, on the other you have the manifest intimidation of students in the classroom.

so while i do have concerns that the bolsonaro government might try to push the bias in the opposite direction (though the ideological orientation of the average teacher is sure to make that very difficult), this absolutely is a real problem that needs addressing.