.
A petromoralidade de Trump
Não celebro o fim da hipocrisia, acho que havia nela uma réstia de ilusão sobre um mundo em que os pequenos conseguem proteger-se contra os desvarios dos grandes.
𝖤𝗆 𝟣𝟫𝟧𝟥, 𝖺 𝖨𝗇𝗀𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖴𝗇𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝖠𝗆𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝖼𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗆 𝖾𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝗈 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝖼𝗋𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖨𝗋𝖺̃𝗈. 𝖠𝗍𝖾́ 𝗁𝖺́ 𝗉𝗈𝗎𝖼𝗈 𝗍𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗈, 𝖺 𝖢𝖨𝖠 𝖾 𝗈 𝖬𝖨𝟨 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗈𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗅𝖺𝗇𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗋𝗎𝖻𝖺𝗋 𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈-𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗈 𝖾𝗅𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈, 𝖬𝗈𝗁𝖺𝗆𝗆𝖾𝖽 𝖬𝗈𝗌𝗌𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗀𝗁, 𝖺𝗍𝖾́ 𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝖾𝗆 𝟤𝟢𝟣𝟥, 𝗎𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗍𝗈́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝗉𝗎𝖻𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖢𝖨𝖠 𝖺𝖽𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗎 𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗇𝗂𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺, 𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖺 𝖾 𝗈 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗈, 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖺 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝗀𝗈𝗅𝗉𝖾.
𝖠 𝗆𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗋𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝗉𝗈𝗂𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖮𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗎-𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖽𝗂𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖺 𝖻𝗋𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗅. 𝖠 𝗋𝖾𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗋𝗈́𝗅𝖾𝗈, 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗎𝗆𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝗀𝗈𝗅𝗉𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈, 𝖿𝗈𝗂 𝗋𝖾𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝖺 𝖿𝖺𝗏𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺̂𝗇𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌, 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖾-𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗌, 𝗁𝗈𝗅𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖿𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌. 𝖣𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝟥𝟪 𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌, 𝗈𝗌 𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗂𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗋𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺𝗌 𝖻𝗋𝗎𝗍𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺. 𝖮 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗉𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋 𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾́𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗅𝗈𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗏𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝗈 𝖼𝖺𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺 𝖱𝖾𝗏𝗈𝗅𝗎𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝟣𝟫𝟩𝟫 𝖾 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗎𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝗍𝖾𝗈𝖼𝗋𝖺́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝗏𝗂𝗈𝗅𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈, 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗅 𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗏𝗈 𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗂𝖺𝗇𝗈 𝖺𝗀𝗈𝗋𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗃𝗈𝗌𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝗋𝗎𝖺𝗌.
𝖨𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗉𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗇𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗈𝗅𝗈́𝗀𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗎𝗆, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗁𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋 𝗈𝗎 𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗍𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗅𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗁𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖻𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼̧𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗑𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗎𝗌𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖾 𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗅𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗋𝗈́𝗅𝖾𝗈 𝖾 𝖺 𝖺𝗌𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖠𝗅𝗂 𝖪𝖺𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝖾𝗂. 𝖣𝖺 𝗆𝖾𝗌𝗆𝖺 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺, 𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗎𝖾́𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗀𝖺 𝖺𝗌 𝗏𝖾𝗋𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗂𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗈𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖺𝖼̧𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗅𝖾𝗏𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗆 𝖺̀ 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝗂𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖨𝗋𝖺𝗊𝗎𝖾, 𝖽𝖾𝗂𝗑𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝗎𝗆 𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖾, 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝖿𝗎𝗀𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝖺 𝖺𝗌𝖼𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖣𝖠𝖤𝖲𝖧.
𝖳𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼̧𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖺, 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗈𝖻𝗋𝗂𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗅𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖺𝖿𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖺𝖼𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗋𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗊𝗎𝗂. 𝖲𝖾́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗎𝗍𝗋𝗂𝗇𝖺 𝖽𝖺 “𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺” 𝖺𝗋𝖽𝗎𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗋 𝖿𝗂𝗅𝗈́𝗌𝗈𝖿𝗈𝗌, 𝗁𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗍𝖾𝗈́𝗅𝗈𝗀𝗈𝗌, 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋𝖾𝗌, 𝗀𝗅𝗈𝗌𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗎𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗌𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗇𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖿𝗋𝖺𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗀𝗇𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝖻𝗌𝗈𝗅𝗎𝗍𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗈 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝗋𝖺𝗌𝗈, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗉𝗋ı́𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗉𝖾, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗅𝗁𝖺: “𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗈𝗌 𝗅𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗅”, 𝗈𝗎 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺, 𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗎𝗇𝗌.
𝖳𝗋𝗎𝗆𝗉 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝖾 𝗁𝗂𝗉𝗈́𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺 𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋𝗈𝗌𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝗈𝗉𝖾𝗋𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝖺 𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗉𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 (𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋) 𝗇𝖺 𝖵𝖾𝗇𝖾𝗓𝗎𝖾𝗅𝖺, 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗈𝗎 𝖽𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝖢𝗈𝗇𝗀𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗇𝖾𝗆 𝖽𝖾 𝖿𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅. 𝖡𝖺𝗌𝗍𝗈𝗎-𝗅𝗁𝖾 𝖺 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖿𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖽𝖺 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗈𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗅ı́𝖿𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗍𝖾-𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗏𝖺𝗓𝗂𝗈 𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈 𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗅.
𝖤́ 𝗍𝗎𝖽𝗈 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗎𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗋, 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝗌𝗎𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖿ı́𝖼𝗂𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗏𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖿𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗇𝗈 𝗌𝖾́𝖼𝗎𝗅𝗈 𝖷𝖵𝖨𝖨 𝖾 𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗋𝗋𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌, 𝖼𝖾𝗆 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗀𝖾𝗇𝗈𝖼ı́𝖽𝗂𝗈? 𝖭𝖺̃𝗈, 𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗈 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝖾́ 𝗍𝗋𝖺𝖻𝖺𝗅𝗁𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗆 𝗌𝗈́.
𝖮 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗈, 𝗈 𝖻𝗈𝖼𝖺𝖽𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝗍𝖺, 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋-𝗅𝗁𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗈 𝗇𝖺 𝖻𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗃𝖺 𝖽𝖺 𝗊𝗎𝗂𝖾𝗍𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖺𝖼𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖾𝗎𝗋𝗈𝗉𝖾𝗂𝖺 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺 𝖼𝗎𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗆 “𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗈𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗅𝖺𝗆 𝖽𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗋𝗈́𝗅𝖾𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗈 𝗌𝖾 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖿𝗈𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖺𝗓𝖺̃𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗂𝗀𝗇𝖺 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖼̧𝖺̃𝗈”.
𝖭𝖺̃𝗈 𝖼𝖾𝗅𝖾𝖻𝗋𝗈 𝗈 𝖿𝗂𝗆 𝖽𝖺 𝗁𝗂𝗉𝗈𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗌𝗂𝖺, 𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗁𝖺𝗏𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗋𝖾́𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗅𝗎𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗎𝗆 𝗆𝗎𝗇𝖽𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝖾𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗍𝖾𝗀𝖾𝗋-𝗌𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗏𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗀𝗋𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗌. 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝖺́ 𝗇𝖺 𝗆𝗈𝖽𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗓𝖺𝗋 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝗋𝖾 𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅, 𝗋𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗓𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗈-𝗈 𝖺̀ 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗆𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗉𝗂𝗅𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗈𝗌 𝗏𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖽𝗈𝗌. 𝖠𝗍𝖾́ 𝖺𝖽𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝗈𝗌 𝖤𝖴𝖠 𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖺 𝗍𝖾𝗌𝖾 𝗌𝖾𝗃𝖺 “𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗅”, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗆𝖾 𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖺𝗇𝗍𝖺 𝖾́ 𝖺 𝗌ı́𝗇𝖽𝗋𝗈𝗆𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖤𝗌𝗍𝗈𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗆𝗈 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖺ı́𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖿𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝖼𝗈𝗌 𝖾 𝗆ı́𝗇𝗂𝗆𝗈𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝟣,𝟩 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗄𝗆² 𝖽𝖾 𝖺́𝗀𝗎𝖺𝗌 𝗆𝖺𝗋ı́𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝗉𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖺𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝗈𝖽𝖾 𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗋 𝖺 𝟦 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗁𝗈̃𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝖾 𝗄𝗆².
𝖤𝗆 𝗇𝖾𝗇𝗁𝗎𝗆𝖺 𝖼𝗂𝗋𝖼𝗎𝗇𝗌𝗍𝖺̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖺 𝗉𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗂𝗅𝗂𝖽𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝗀𝖺𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋 𝗆𝗂𝗅𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝗌𝗎𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗂𝖺 𝗇𝗈 𝖠𝗍𝗅𝖺̂𝗇𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈, 𝗈 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝗂 𝗈𝗌 𝖠𝖼̧𝗈𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖲𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗆 𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝖿ı́𝖼𝗂𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾́ 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 (𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗉𝗈𝗍𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌) 𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗌𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗂𝖺?
𝖲𝖾𝗋𝖺́ 𝖺𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗆 𝗍𝖺̃𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝖿ı́𝖼𝗂𝗅 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝖾́ 𝖽𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝖽𝖾 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝖽𝖺 𝗆𝖺𝗂𝗈𝗋𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖾𝗌𝗍𝖺𝖽𝗈𝗌 (𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗇𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗉𝗈𝗍𝖾̂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗌) 𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗋 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗌𝖺 𝖽𝗈 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖾 𝖽𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝖾𝗂𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖾𝗅𝖺 𝗌𝗈𝖻𝖾𝗋𝖺𝗇𝗂𝖺?
𝖤𝗇𝗊𝗎𝖺𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗏𝗈, 𝗍𝗋𝗈𝗉𝖺𝗌 𝖺𝗅𝖾𝗆𝖺̃𝗌, 𝗇𝗈𝗋𝗎𝖾𝗀𝗎𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌, 𝗌𝗎𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗌 𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗆𝖺𝗋𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝖺𝗌 𝗌𝖺̃𝗈 𝗌𝗂𝗆𝖻𝗈𝗅𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝖾𝗆𝖻𝖺𝗋𝖼𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 “𝖽𝖾𝖿𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋” 𝖺 𝖦𝗋𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗅𝖺̂𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗏𝗈𝗋𝖺𝗓𝖾𝗌 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝗋. 𝖳𝗋𝗎𝗆𝗉. 𝖬𝖺𝗌 𝗁𝖺́ 𝖾𝗆 𝖯𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗆 𝖺𝖼𝗁𝖾 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗈 𝗇𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗈 𝖾́ 𝖾𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗅𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝗎𝗆 𝖽𝗈𝗌 𝗅ı́𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗂𝗌 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗌 𝗉𝖺𝗋𝖺 𝗌𝖾𝗋 𝗈 “𝗇𝗈𝗌𝗌𝗈 𝗅ı́𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗍𝖺́𝗋𝗂𝗈”. 𝖲𝗈𝗇𝗁𝖺𝗆 𝖼𝗈𝗆 𝗈 𝗂𝗆𝗉𝖾́𝗋𝗂𝗈 𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝖾𝗂𝗍𝖺𝗆 𝗉𝖺𝗍𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖺𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖾𝗋-𝗌𝖾 𝖾𝗆 𝗉𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗇𝗈 𝗃𝖺𝗋𝖽𝗂𝗇𝖾𝗂𝗋𝗈 𝖽𝗈 𝗌𝖾𝗎 𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖺𝗅… 𝗊𝗎𝖾 𝗉𝖺𝗍𝖾́𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗈 “𝗂𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾 𝗇𝖺𝖼𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅.
* Dirigente do Bloco de Esquerda, licenciada em relações internacionais.
IN "EXPRESSO"- 17/01/26 ,
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário