If Pacheco is a socdem, and this is a counterargument, it appears he’s reassuring Pacheco that you can make the changes necessary for Brazil without having a revolution, which is what social democracy was built for, to prevent revolutions and anything from fundamentally changing, which is in tune with social democracy being centrist.
If Pacheco is a socdem, and this is a counterargument, it appears he’s reassuring Pacheco that you can make the changes necessary for Brazil without having a revolution, which is what social democracy was built for, to prevent revolutions and anything from fundamentally changing, which is in tune with social democracy being centrist.
That’s my reading if it helps.
I think that makes sense yeah. Thanks.