The Manipulation of Hunger in Brazil: Recently, the public debate has been dominated by alarming statistics about food insecurity in Brazil. Amid these discussions, it is crucial to clarify some information and correct persistent misconceptions. This article aims to unmask the frequently made claims about the impact of Lula’s government policies on hunger in the country.
The Myth of Eradicated Hunger
One of the main arguments put forward by Lula and his supporters is that the PT government eradicated hunger in Brazil. In an interview with the “Pode Pá” podcast, Lula claimed that in 2012, the UN recognized the elimination of hunger in Brazil. However, this statement is demonstrably false.
According to IBGE research, which has monitored food insecurity since 2004, Brazil has never completely eradicated hunger. In 2012, about 7 million Brazilians were in a state of hunger, representing almost 4% of the population.
Data and Contradictions
It is important to note that many widely circulated numbers, such as the claim of 19 million people hungry in 2020 and 33 million families in 2021, do not come from official sources like IBGE. These figures came from surveys conducted by organizations such as Vox Populi and do not reflect an adequate comparison with previous indices.
Furthermore, during the economic crisis and the pandemic, Brazil saw a significant reduction in extreme poverty. Data from the Getúlio Vargas Foundation (FGV) show that 15 million Brazilians exited poverty by August 2020, a 23% decrease during the period. The average value of Auxílio Brasil, which replaced Bolsa Família, is also higher than the previous program’s average, benefiting more people.
The Impact of the Economic Crisis and the Pandemic
During the PT government, food insecurity in Brazil worsened. The economic crisis caused by years of corruption and mismanagement under the PT led to a 62% increase in food insecurity from 2013 to 2017, not including the effects of the pandemic or international conflicts.
Conclusion
The claim that Lula’s government eradicated hunger is a distortion of reality. Evidence shows that hunger and food insecurity persisted and, at times, worsened. Data manipulation and poor economic management had a significant impact on the quality of life for Brazilians.
The debate about hunger in Brazil should be based on accurate and verifiable data, not on myths and unfounded claims. The truth is that, while the country has made some progress, the fight against hunger remains a persistent challenge.
Discrepancies and Misleading Claims: Lula’s Accusations Against Bolsonaro
President Lula (PT) distorted the facts in his inauguration speech at the National Congress by accusing the Bolsonaro government of causing 33 million Brazilians to face hunger and 100 million to fall into poverty.
Watch the speech here: YouTube Video
Read the full speech at Congress here: Congress Website
“Our initial actions aim to rescue 33 million people from hunger and lift more than 100 million Brazilians from poverty, who endured the harshest burden of the national destruction project that ends today,” said Lula.
Throughout the electoral campaign, the former president linked these figures, especially the 33 million in hunger, to the Bolsonaro government. For more details on these claims and their fact-checking, see the following link: Distortions and Lies.
Graphs and Real Data
Extreme Poverty in Brazil (2013-2020)
Food Insecurity in Brazil (2013-2020)
Relevant Links
- Agência Brasil: Brazil has 33 million people in food insecurity, according to research
- Folha de S.Paulo: Food Insecurity in Brazil – An Analysis of the Data
- G1: Study shows increase in food insecurity in Brazil
- Revista Zoom: Food Insecurity in Brazil – What Do the Latest Data Say?
- BBC Brasil: The Food Crisis in Brazil and the Challenges Faced
Comparative Analysis: Hunger and Poverty in Brazil
To better understand the current situation of hunger and poverty in Brazil, it’s important to compare these issues with historical data and international benchmarks. This comparison helps to contextualize the claims made about the impact of different governments on these critical issues.
Data Sources: