MV Bill and Celso Athayde, born in the favelas Cidade de Deus and Favela do Sapo, respectively, were impressed by Luis Eduardo’s work and his ideas regarding Rio’s favelas. “I saw that geographic distance did not hinder an ideological approximation. I was surprised by his understanding of the violence. The fact that he was sub-secretary of Security in Rio de Janeiro did not make him an enemy. I always wanted police chiefs to be partners with the favelas,” said MV Bill.
Three years and several meetings later, the three closed a deal: write a book on youth involved in the drug trade and organized armed violence in Brazil. The result is ‘Cabeça de Porco’ (Editora Objetiva), released on May 30 in Rio de Janeiro. The book mixes reflections on urban violence and seven years of ethnographic research carried out by Soares, with interviews conducted by Bill and Celso in drug selling points in nine Brazilian cities.
The similarities lived by youth in Rio de Janeiro, where the largest drug factions are located, and youth from small cities such as Joinville in the country’s relatively affluent South region, are some of the book’s most important findings. In both cities, adolescents are similarly involved in organisations and hierarchical structures, and use common slang.
“The similarities between the cities are the following: poor kids, frequently black, are recruited by the drug trade, and are ever younger. They don’t understand the process and are its victims. First they are victims and then they are victimisers; and finally are victims again when they die young,” said Luis Eduardo Soares to COAV.
According to the authors, the main objective of the book is to put a human face on the young people involved in the drug trade – without taking away from their responsibility for crimes committed. And that is exactly the book’s strength.
“I did not need to stay involved in crime. I wanted the love of my aunt, of a mom, which I never had. I wanted a family, which was there when I needed to talk to someone,” says a 16 year-old after describing his involvement in a brutal assassination.
All of the interviews were conducted on video tape and will result in a documentary – the third phase of the project, which began with the MV Bill video ‘Soldado do Morro.’
“Repression should be the last resort. Before that, there is a lot to be done in the form of prevention, reinsertion, education, and self-esteem. Do we want to exterminate youth or integrate them,” asks Soares.
COAV – Rio de Janeiro, Recife and Vitória are the cities in the book that have the highest violence rates in Brazil. What are the main differences and similarities between youth in the drug trade in Rio and in the other nine cities in the book?
LE: Each of the nine cities has its specificities. But there are some common aspects that surprise even those who are familiar with these cities, including residents. For example, who would imagine “battles,” long associated with Rio favelas, in the vilas of Porto Alegre, in Brazil’s South? The similarities are the following: Poor children, often black, are recruited by the drug trade, and they are ever younger. First they are victims and then victimizers, and victims again since they usually die before the age of 25. Another similarity, police are, with few honest exceptions, part of the problem and not the solution due to their arbitrary brutality, corruption, lack of preparation and incapacity to follow the law.
What are the differences between youth involved in the drug trade now and those involved in the 80s and the 90s? Is there a gratification of death? Are youth today more violent?
All of those who deal with the problem of violence recognize that there has been an increase in the level of violence and in cruelty over the past decade. An increase that, surprisingly, corresponds to a decrease in the age of youth involved. That is one of the biggest dilemmas facing us. Perhaps this phenomenon has to do with the fact that younger children have not developed as much the ability to censure their acts or that they are more subject to peer pressure.
You recently said that “a black person walking on the street of a large city is socially invisible” and that a weapon is a passport to becoming visible. MV Bill said that he has experienced being invisible. Do you think that having access to information, higher education and projects that increase self-esteem could be a way out of violence?
Without a doubt. I am convinced of that. In our book we do not forget the importance of economic power, but we stress the importance of inter-subjectivity, symbolism, affection, psychology and culture. Not because that is more important, but because society has not paid them proper attention. We have to offer youth at a minimum what the drug trade offers: material resources, of course, but also recognition, a sense of belonging and of value. In the end, there is a hunger more profound than physical hunger: the hunger for affection and recognition, which raise self-esteem.
What can be done to make residents of Rio trust in the police again?
Start over. Restructure the police, take advantage of those who are qualified and honest, and dismiss the rest, reorganising formation, knowledge management, management, investigation, prevention and external control.
Governments are currently debating the efficacy of repression in dealing with violence. Do you believe that prevention projects, reinsertion and education can resolve the problem of violence alone or is repression also necessary?
I think that a utopia would be a society that does not resort to repression. But ‘repression’ has become a bad word, always associated to dictatorships and to the denial of liberty and human dignity. However, when we repress aggression suffered by a child or an innocent victim, we are not repressing the individual liberty of the aggressor, but protecting life, defending the rights of the victim, right? As such, a libertarian vision of the world can be compatible with certain acts of repression, as long as they are carried out to protect certain rights and liberties. On the other hand, I think that repression should be the last resort. Before repression, there is a lot to be done in the way of prevention, such as reinsertion, education, and boosting self-worth. If we want someone to change, we have to provide the foundation. No one changes if he or she thinks that they are worth nothing. Do we want to exterminate poor youth or integrate them? Pardon and give a second chance also means forgiving ourselves and giving ourselves a second chance, as a society. Wouldn’t it be great for us to have the chance of escaping from the horrible guilt of having abandoned thousands of children to the fate of picking up a gun?
