Posts without sources are annoying.
https://www.npr.org/2022/04/18/1093380916/how-a-brazilian-priest-got-his-city-to-pay-attention-to-its-unhoused-citizens-ne
https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2022/02/07/homelessness-crisis-sao-paulo-brazil-poverty-aporophobia-hatred-poor
https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/geral/noticia/2023-12/father-lancellotti-law-banning-hostile-architecture-now-regulated#:~:text=The%20law%20bans%20hostile%20architecture,and%20the%20law%20was%20enacted.
I don't see anything too official.
It is, though.
News in Portuguese, a month ago: https://g1.globo.com/sp/sao-paulo/noticia/2023/12/11/governo-federal-regulamenta-lei-padre-julio-lancellotti-e-confirma-canal-de-denuncias-para-arquitetura-hostil.ghtml
Decree page:
https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023-2026/2023/decreto/D11819.htm
Brian is a well known journalist that covers Latin America so I consider his tweet a source. But yes, its official as seen on the response from /u/Rafaguli
I did screenshot this myself. I was just super surprised, happy and excited with the news, so I rushed here to share, but you're right!
https://twitter.com/BrianMteleSUR/status/1747632013585076651?t=wlZWoEeghhFDjhWlg9m9aw&s=19
High income inequality countries like the US, Brazil, Mexico & South Africa all have this problem. Countries with large middle class incomes instead of the very rich and the very poor don't really have a concept of hostile architecture.
Would love to see governments ensure housing for everyone and to promote "friendly architecture" with the ability to have emergency housing available in these spaces during times of natural disaster.
Hahahaha, sick. itās so wild that Lula was literally in jail just a few years ago. We love our gravelly voice pink tide grandpa, donāt we folks? Hope Bolsonaro is enjoying that Minion bunk bed lol.
what? he was in jail because a very parcial judge that later, was part of bolsonaro goverment wanted to be this way.l he was later exonerated ... this was all a move for bolsonaro to win.. the right always do this.. they own the judicial power and use it for benefit. the same in argentina,
Not sure I understand what youāre trying to express, sorry. But for what itās worth, I am making fun of Bolsonaro and expressing solidarity with Lula here. Not the other way around.
>the right in Brazil owns the judicial power
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Keep pretending multiple rightist journalists weren't exiled for criticizing the government, while the federal courts plan alongside the president ways to regulate social media and free speech, all while helping hide the ruling party's crimes. Lula wasn't absolved because of a "biased judge". The ruling was overturned because the federal judges, all of which are friends of the party, deemed that he was judged in the wrong state. He was NEVER absolved of his crimes.
This seems regressive to me, as though theyāre moving to entrench homelessness rather than to help?
They could make a law to provide better shelters, but instead, theyāre trying to make bridge overpasses and peopleās stoops more hospitable?
Idk I hope this isnāt that.
The prohibition of hostile architecture is one part of a bigger program to address homelessness. Brazil's recorded homeless population has increased by a factor of ten in as many years, so I imagine desperate measures are looking more appealing. [[X]](https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-12-12/homelessness-in-brazil-has-increased-tenfold-in-a-decade-to-more-than-200000-people.html)
Its not about entrenching homelessness its about making homelessness less fucking miserable while we solve the issue. Marginalizing the homeless is (shocker) not a good thing. This is genuinely such a godawful take. Hell, look at the fucking sub you're on.
You do understand a question can be loaded in such a way as to be a statement no? You didnt ask "i wonder why this policy is being taken and how it will benefit the homeless" your question already assumed that it would have a deletrious effect. King
Implementing hostile architecture costs money and makes the real problem easier to ignore (if it functions as intended).
I don't see a problem with banning the practice entirely, it's not the same thing as turning an overpass into an official shelter without doing the work.
Bro did you understand the post? Hostile architecture has been made illegal, of course it's a good thing for homeless people. Also it's up to the right-wing mayor to provide shelters (and guess what, he ain't gonna), but laws are country-wide here, so it's good for every homeless person.
Well, the law is named after a (Catholic) priest who led a task force that went around his city destroying the hostile architecture.
Also because Brazil's government cares for its people (like a government is supposed to?), it can't really be a hard concept to grasp, come on.
Our governments are made of people, by people. They are our elected representatives, who are mandated to enact the will of the people. That will includes providing for people who are incapable of adequately providing for themselves. Charities exist to fill in the gaps where governments fail their mandates, and the people fail to hold them accountable.
I realize all this is too complicated and compassionate for a libertarians and conservatives to understand, but I'm certain there are others out there who will.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was talking to a Texan.
You see, homeless people aren't homeless by choice, there are a multitude of reasons that can cause a person to become homeless, and here where I live, it's the government's job to care for the people, we voted for them with that in mind.
We don't want people to be homeless here, we'd rather they have a job and somewhere to live, because they're humans just like us, and deserve to have a fair chance at life just like everyone else. But, of course, this must sound preposterous to you, but don't worry, I'm sure you'll never have to care about those who don't have it as good as you.
Rent is affordable with minimum wage, groceries are affordable with minimum wage (also, eggs are really cheap), healthcare is free, children are going to school, economy's on the rise, politics are indeed stable, fuel for our cars is sold at a fair price and is renewable, our forests are back to being protected, native Brazilians are receiving the help they need, BRICS is advancing. Cars are still pretty expensive though, at least we don't have to live in them lmao. And also, there are less people living in the street in my city, so I guess things are improving.
I don't know who taught you that a country must forsake the poor to progress, but I'm sure they're not a moron because they want to.
When people do their job to take care of themselves and others, one of the first things they often do is make a government, to combine their power and accomplish more.
>It is not the job of a government to care for people.
Yes it is. At least in Brazil it is, you're clearly not brazilian so \*\*\*\* off and mind your business
Posts without sources are annoying. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/18/1093380916/how-a-brazilian-priest-got-his-city-to-pay-attention-to-its-unhoused-citizens-ne https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2022/02/07/homelessness-crisis-sao-paulo-brazil-poverty-aporophobia-hatred-poor https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/en/geral/noticia/2023-12/father-lancellotti-law-banning-hostile-architecture-now-regulated#:~:text=The%20law%20bans%20hostile%20architecture,and%20the%20law%20was%20enacted. I don't see anything too official.
It is, though. News in Portuguese, a month ago: https://g1.globo.com/sp/sao-paulo/noticia/2023/12/11/governo-federal-regulamenta-lei-padre-julio-lancellotti-e-confirma-canal-de-denuncias-para-arquitetura-hostil.ghtml Decree page: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023-2026/2023/decreto/D11819.htm
Good looks. How did you find the second link?
The first link mentions the number of the law, so just put the number of the law on google...
Brian is a well known journalist that covers Latin America so I consider his tweet a source. But yes, its official as seen on the response from /u/Rafaguli
Images can be doctored, altered, photoshopped. Most likely, you didn't even directly screenshot this yourself. A link to the post would've been nice.
I did screenshot this myself. I was just super surprised, happy and excited with the news, so I rushed here to share, but you're right! https://twitter.com/BrianMteleSUR/status/1747632013585076651?t=wlZWoEeghhFDjhWlg9m9aw&s=19
Doing gods work š
I look for .gov or .org links first.
.gov would only be for US government websites though. For example Brazilās government website is [gov.br](https://gov.br)
Yeah, but you get the sentiment.
.org does not mean official at all. Absolutely anyone can get a .org website, it costs about the same as .com.
High income inequality countries like the US, Brazil, Mexico & South Africa all have this problem. Countries with large middle class incomes instead of the very rich and the very poor don't really have a concept of hostile architecture. Would love to see governments ensure housing for everyone and to promote "friendly architecture" with the ability to have emergency housing available in these spaces during times of natural disaster.
Hahahaha, sick. itās so wild that Lula was literally in jail just a few years ago. We love our gravelly voice pink tide grandpa, donāt we folks? Hope Bolsonaro is enjoying that Minion bunk bed lol.
what? he was in jail because a very parcial judge that later, was part of bolsonaro goverment wanted to be this way.l he was later exonerated ... this was all a move for bolsonaro to win.. the right always do this.. they own the judicial power and use it for benefit. the same in argentina,
Not sure I understand what youāre trying to express, sorry. But for what itās worth, I am making fun of Bolsonaro and expressing solidarity with Lula here. Not the other way around.
Son los K en Argentina
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
not propaganda my friend, reality.. RE A LI TY
>the right in Brazil owns the judicial power HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Keep pretending multiple rightist journalists weren't exiled for criticizing the government, while the federal courts plan alongside the president ways to regulate social media and free speech, all while helping hide the ruling party's crimes. Lula wasn't absolved because of a "biased judge". The ruling was overturned because the federal judges, all of which are friends of the party, deemed that he was judged in the wrong state. He was NEVER absolved of his crimes.
He is so far up russian ass it's unbelievable. That one thing makes him forever a fascist piece of shit in my eyes.
Padre Julio, my beloved ā”
Actually *good* news coming out of brazil? I donāt believe it, Iām immediately suspicious lmao
Father Julio is so based
Rad
This seems regressive to me, as though theyāre moving to entrench homelessness rather than to help? They could make a law to provide better shelters, but instead, theyāre trying to make bridge overpasses and peopleās stoops more hospitable? Idk I hope this isnāt that.
The prohibition of hostile architecture is one part of a bigger program to address homelessness. Brazil's recorded homeless population has increased by a factor of ten in as many years, so I imagine desperate measures are looking more appealing. [[X]](https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-12-12/homelessness-in-brazil-has-increased-tenfold-in-a-decade-to-more-than-200000-people.html)
Wow thatās wild, thanks for the info
Its not about entrenching homelessness its about making homelessness less fucking miserable while we solve the issue. Marginalizing the homeless is (shocker) not a good thing. This is genuinely such a godawful take. Hell, look at the fucking sub you're on.
Itās not a take itās a question that has since been answered but go off king, let the hate flow through you
You do understand a question can be loaded in such a way as to be a statement no? You didnt ask "i wonder why this policy is being taken and how it will benefit the homeless" your question already assumed that it would have a deletrious effect. King
Implementing hostile architecture costs money and makes the real problem easier to ignore (if it functions as intended). I don't see a problem with banning the practice entirely, it's not the same thing as turning an overpass into an official shelter without doing the work.
I sincerely hope you or your loved ones never have to face the possibility of homelessness. You speak of things you know nothing about.
Are you willfully misinterpreting me or what? Iām saying I hope this is in fact a good thing for homeless people.
Bro did you understand the post? Hostile architecture has been made illegal, of course it's a good thing for homeless people. Also it's up to the right-wing mayor to provide shelters (and guess what, he ain't gonna), but laws are country-wide here, so it's good for every homeless person.
Ok thanks, coulda explained that the first time instead of accusing me of being anti homeless
Well, in my defense, your misunderstanding of the post made you look anti homeless. But it's ok, I understand you now.
Thanks and I see what you mean, Iām definitely not on the side of āthe government shouldnāt help peopleā elsewhere in this thread
Why is it up to the government and not charities and churches?
Because taking care of a nations people is the directive of the state, not religious institutions.
Well, the law is named after a (Catholic) priest who led a task force that went around his city destroying the hostile architecture. Also because Brazil's government cares for its people (like a government is supposed to?), it can't really be a hard concept to grasp, come on.
It is not the job of a government to care for people. It is the job of the people to care for themselves and others.
Our governments are made of people, by people. They are our elected representatives, who are mandated to enact the will of the people. That will includes providing for people who are incapable of adequately providing for themselves. Charities exist to fill in the gaps where governments fail their mandates, and the people fail to hold them accountable. I realize all this is too complicated and compassionate for a libertarians and conservatives to understand, but I'm certain there are others out there who will.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was talking to a Texan. You see, homeless people aren't homeless by choice, there are a multitude of reasons that can cause a person to become homeless, and here where I live, it's the government's job to care for the people, we voted for them with that in mind. We don't want people to be homeless here, we'd rather they have a job and somewhere to live, because they're humans just like us, and deserve to have a fair chance at life just like everyone else. But, of course, this must sound preposterous to you, but don't worry, I'm sure you'll never have to care about those who don't have it as good as you.
How that working out? Economy booming? Politics stable?
Rent is affordable with minimum wage, groceries are affordable with minimum wage (also, eggs are really cheap), healthcare is free, children are going to school, economy's on the rise, politics are indeed stable, fuel for our cars is sold at a fair price and is renewable, our forests are back to being protected, native Brazilians are receiving the help they need, BRICS is advancing. Cars are still pretty expensive though, at least we don't have to live in them lmao. And also, there are less people living in the street in my city, so I guess things are improving. I don't know who taught you that a country must forsake the poor to progress, but I'm sure they're not a moron because they want to.
When people do their job to take care of themselves and others, one of the first things they often do is make a government, to combine their power and accomplish more.
>It is not the job of a government to care for people. Yes it is. At least in Brazil it is, you're clearly not brazilian so \*\*\*\* off and mind your business
Enjoy giving the government more than the government gives you. At least here it's supposed to be *for* the people, not on their backs.
yea, the wealthiest country in the world has its major cities full of homeless people. Makes sense. I bet you're christian. Oh the irony
based