The Numbers Don’t Lie: 68% Approval

First of all, let’s get to the concrete data from the Genial/Quaest poll. In this sense, 68% of Rio de Janeiro city residents approve the mega-operation against criminal factions. Consequently, this isn’t a simple majority – it’s overwhelming approval, almost 7 out of 10 Rio residents.

Additionally, it’s worth highlighting: this poll was conducted with capital residents, precisely the people who live daily under the threat of organized crime. Therefore, these aren’t opinions from those who comfortably watch the news from afar, but from those who feel violence’s effects firsthand.

Who Are These 68%?

On the other hand, it’s fundamental to understand who comprises this majority. In this context, they’re mothers who fear losing children in crossfire, workers who need to cross areas controlled by traffickers, shopkeepers extorted by factions. That is, real people with real problems.

Consequently, when two-thirds of the population approve police action, this reflects accumulated desperation of decades. Therefore, ignoring these numbers is ignoring the suffering of millions who don’t have the luxury of theorizing about “structural violence” in university gatherings.

The Hypocrisy of the Noisy Minority

Critics Who Live in Safe Neighborhoods

First, let’s name the elephant in the room. The overwhelming majority of this operation’s critics live in areas where organized crime doesn’t exist. In this sense, from the comfort of Leblon, Ipanema, or Copacabana, they feel comfortable questioning actions that protect those who live in communities.

For example, how many of these critics have children studying in schools where traffickers recruit kids? How many need to pay “toll” to a trafficker to get home? Consequently, the hypocrisy is glaring: those who don’t live the problem think they have the right to prevent the solution.

NGOs and “Human Rights Activists”

Additionally, a significant part of criticism comes from NGOs and self-proclaimed human rights defenders. However, where were these organizations when children were being recruited by factions? On the other hand, they appear immediately when police act against criminals.

Consequently, it becomes evident: for this crowd, human rights only apply to criminals, never to victims. Therefore, it’s not about justice – it’s about ideology that, in practice, protects organized crime.

What the Poll Really Reveals

Tired of False Narratives

First, 68% approval demonstrates that the population no longer swallows narratives that paint criminals as victims. In this sense, decades of discourse about “social context” and “lack of opportunities” haven’t convinced those who live daily with terror imposed by factions.

For example, residents saw traffickers with rifles, helicopters, and mansions. Consequently, the discourse of “victims of society” sounds like a cruel joke to those who truly suffer. Therefore, massive approval reflects awakening to reality that ideological elite insists on denying.

Demand for Real Security

Additionally, numbers show the population wants effective action, not theory. In this context, after decades of social projects that didn’t prevent faction growth, Rio residents demand practical results. That is, less talk, more action.

Consequently, this popular demand disproves the narrative that police operations would be “rejected by the community.” Therefore, those who really live in communities support police action – those who criticize live far from the problem.

Why Do Some Insist on Criticizing?

Ideological Commitment Above Lives

First, we need to question critics’ motivations. In this sense, when data shows 68% approval but some insist on opposing, there’s clearly an ideological agenda at play. On the other hand, if they really cared about the population, they’d respect their will.

For example, left-wing politicians criticizing the operation have a history of tolerance toward factions. Moreover, some go as far as doing live streams in trafficker-controlled areas, as recently documented. Consequently, it’s not hard to connect the dots.

Interest in Maintaining Status Quo

Additionally, some benefit politically from chaos. In this context, organized crime provides justification for ineffective social programs, jobs in parasitic NGOs, and electoral narratives about “genocidal state.” Therefore, solving the problem would eliminate a source of resources and power.

Consequently, resistance isn’t about protecting the population, but about protecting structures that profit from the problem. That is, they prefer perpetuating suffering that threatens their political and financial interests.

The Voice of Those Who Live the Problem

Residents Celebrate Operation

First, videos circulating on social media show community residents celebrating police entry. In this sense, they applaud, thank, and demonstrate relief. On the other hand, this reality is conveniently ignored by those who prefer the “oppressive police” narrative.

For example, mothers who can finally let children play in the street, shopkeepers who no longer need to pay extortion, young people who can attend school without fear. Consequently, the positive impact is immense and immediate for those who truly matter.

The Ignored Testimony

Additionally, residents’ testimonies are systematically ignored by mainstream media. In this context, when they support the operation, they’re accused of being “under coercion” or “not understanding their own rights.” On the other hand, when they criticize, they become national headlines.

Consequently, media bias is clear, only valuing voices that confirm pre-established narrative. Therefore, residents are treated as pawns, without right to their own opinion that contradicts dominant ideology.

Comparison With Other Countries

El Salvador: Success Model

First, it’s worth observing El Salvador’s case. In this context, President Bukele implemented massive operations against gangs, with popular approval above 90%. Consequently, a country that was one of the world’s most violent saw crime plummet.

On the other hand, international elite harshly criticized the measures. However, the Salvadoran population experienced for the first time in decades being able to walk the streets safely. Therefore, those who lived under gang terror don’t care about criticism from those who never set foot there.

Colombia Against FARC

Additionally, Colombia faced similar criticism when fighting FARC. In this context, international NGOs accused “human rights violations” while terrorist guerrilla killed thousands. On the other hand, Colombian government prioritized population security.

Consequently, after decades of struggle, FARC was dismantled and peace returned for millions. Therefore, ignoring ideological criticism and focusing on results proved to be the correct strategy.

What Changed With the Operation?

Liberated Territories

First, the most visible result was liberation of territories previously controlled by factions. In this sense, areas where the State had been absent for decades finally saw effective police presence. Consequently, the population recovered the basic right to come and go without asking traffickers’ permission.

For example, children can go to school without crossing drug sales points. Moreover, ambulances can enter to attend emergencies without negotiating with factions. That is, fundamental rights finally respected.

War Arsenal Seizure

Additionally, the amount of weaponry seized shocked even specialists. In this context, rifles, machine guns, grenades, and even military equipment were found. On the other hand, this arsenal was in densely populated areas, daily threatening civilians.

Consequently, each seized weapon represents potentially saved lives. Therefore, criticizing an operation that removed war arsenal from civilian areas is defending that the population remain hostage to armed factions.

The Fallacy of “Social Approach”

Decades of Projects That Didn’t Work

First, critics always propose “social approach” as alternative. However, this strategy was exhaustively tried for decades. In this sense, billions were invested in social programs while organized crime only grew.

For example, during Workers’ Party governments, social investment was record-breaking. On the other hand, factions were never so strong and armed. Consequently, empirical evidence demolished the theory that social programs replace public security.

It’s Not One or the Other

Additionally, no sensible person defends only repression without social investment. In this context, the ideal is combination: security to allow social programs to work. On the other hand, without security, any program becomes hostage to factions.

Consequently, the false dichotomy between “security or social” is dishonest. Therefore, police operation doesn’t exclude social programs – it actually creates conditions for them to work effectively.

The Media’s Role

Biased Coverage

First, mainstream media has extremely selective treatment of police operations. In this sense, focus always falls on supposed “excesses,” never on saved lives or prevented crimes. On the other hand, when factions kill, coverage is minimal.

For example, dozens of deaths caused by traffickers become statistics. Moreover, one death in police confrontation becomes national headline with questions about “proportionality.” Consequently, bias is glaring and harms public perception.

Ignoring Positive Data

Additionally, polls like this Genial/Quaest one receive minimal coverage. In this context, 68% approval data should be main headline, but was practically ignored. On the other hand, any minority criticism gains disproportionate prominence.

Consequently, the population forms opinions based on ideologically filtered information. Therefore, media fails gravely in its role of objectively informing, preferring to shape narratives according to agenda.

What Comes Next?

Need to Maintain Presence

First, the operation was an unquestionable initial success. However, the challenge now is maintaining liberated territories. In this sense, permanent police presence is absolutely essential to prevent faction return.

For example, past operations failed precisely due to lack of permanent occupation. Consequently, after police exit, factions returned even more violent. Therefore, the error cannot be repeated this time.

Integration of Public Services

Additionally, with security established, it’s time to bring effective public services. In this context, health, education, and infrastructure need to arrive now that the State has regained control. On the other hand, without prior security, no service would work.

Consequently, the correct sequence is: first security, then development. Therefore, criticizing police operation is sabotaging exactly what allows social programs to function.

Conclusion: Democracy Has Spoken

In summary, the Genial/Quaest poll sheds definitive light on the debate. First, 68% of Rio residents – people who live the problem daily – approve the operation. Consequently, popular will is clear and must be respected.

On the other hand, a noisy minority continues criticizing from the comfort of safe areas. In this sense, hypocrisy is unbearable: they want to prevent others from having security they already enjoy. Therefore, their criticisms should be identified for what they are – ideological protection of organized crime.

Moreover, data demolishes narratives that operations would be “rejected by the community.” Actually, those who live in communities support actions that finally free them from decades under faction dominion. Consequently, defending criminals against victims’ will is moral complicity with violence.

Therefore, it’s time to prioritize the voice of those who suffer over the theory of those who never lived the problem. Additionally, rulers need courage to ignore ideological criticism and follow popular mandate for security.

What about you? Will you stand with the 68% who want real security? Or will you join the minority that prefers protecting criminals while the population suffers?

Want to keep following real data that disproves ideological narratives? Follow fact-based analyses, not theory. After all, numbers don’t lie – they only bother those who live off false narratives!