There is a long list of reasons not to support Jair Bolsonaro in the upcoming runoff election in Brazil. For example, some might believe that his public comments recently could be taken as a threat against democratic institutions. In the first round of voting, where he happened to shock the polls and come surprisingly close to first-place winner Lula of the Workers’ Party, he warned that he might just reject the results if he loses. This concept might sound frighteningly similar to another western hemisphere populist who recently lost an election and contested the result. I’m talking about Former President Donald Trump, of course. Indeed, many do not like Bolsonaro’s approach to national economics, as he focuses on continuing privatization of the state and shifting the socioeconomic scheme from the state-controlled agency system to a laissez-faire economy where businesses are given unregulated free reign over different sectors of the economy. He’s also known for his homophobic sentiment and has even referred to those taking COVID-19 seriously with an extremely homophobic slur.

Bolsonaro is a typical autocratic politician operating within a democracy, who at the surface level is just a populist who is running against the establishment and working for the people by reducing the power of the state. However, there is always much more evil behind the scenes. As an outsider, I’m going to make an appeal for why I think this election is particularly important for the entire globe. While democracy, social-welfare and tax schemes are important domestic arguments against Bolsonaro, an international argument against continuing his regime is his environmental policies. In fact, the world’s most important lung is at stake.

What is the Bolsonaro administration doing to harm the Amazon? Well, everything. The choice in this election is quite literally between a regime that wants to deregulate and destroy the forest for the agricultural industry and a new regime that will bring back past efforts from left-wing and moderate governments to protect the Amazon from deforestation. According to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, under the previous Lula government from 2003 to 2010, the Amazon went from losing over 25,000 square kilometers annually to around 5,000 square kilometers annually. This is because, in direct contrast to the Bolsonaro regime, the Lula regime of the early 2000s sought to put limits on deforestation to protect the Amazon. This is obviously in stark contrast to the destruction that has been created under Bolsonaro. The Bolsonaro regime not only committed natural crimes against the Amazon but also pushed away environmentalists that were giving him dire warnings about the consequences for the nation and the entire planet. Bolsonaro has pursued destroying natural rainforests for short-term economic benefit, despite the high damage it entails for groups indigenous to the area and the health of the rainforest ecosystem. Admittedly, Bolsonaro seems to even be a bad free-market economist. The long-run consequences for entire sectors of the private Brazilian economy would likely be disastrous with the destruction of more portions of the Amazon. But, like many politicians, the short-term benefits of his regime are the only consideration.

In 2022, a predictive study for CarbonBrief found that Bolsonaro losing the election would lead to a cut in Amazon deforestation by 89 percent. Let that sink in for a moment. If, by a simple majority, the people of Brazil decide to vote for Lula in this one general election, nearly 90 percent of projected deforestation in the Amazon can be prevented. The reason for this statistical discrepancy comes from the philosophical and economic differences of Bolsonaro and Lula’s environmental agendas. Bolsonaro’s administration has continued to grant access to private businesses and landowners to cut down more Amazon land, while Lula would likely cut off these ties and prevent the onslaught. The Amazon is important for a number of reasons, many of which you can probably already imagine. Nevertheless, I will list just a few for clarification. First, the amount of trees and greenery available in the Amazon is unlike anywhere else on the planet above the ocean’s surface, and they are required for capturing carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere and balancing the carbon dioxide versus oxygen atmospheric concentration. Additionally, the water from natural processes that is put into the atmosphere and into the oceans by this forest can have a great impact on the global climate all over the world and currents. Finally, the Amazon is sacred for both medicinal and cultural purposes, and is therefore vital to protect.

Climate change is a global phenomenon. As its effects become more drastic, debates over environmental issues will be prevalent in many local and international elections. In many capitalist democracies, there will be a battle between the interests of the private business lobbyists and working class activists. Elections like the one taking place in Brazil are not just important for Brazilian citizens, but also for global citizens. If we step back and ignore politicians who use laissez-faire economics to justify the destruction of entire ecosystems, the environment will be damaged beyond repair. A vote for Lula is not just a vote for a liberal politician that stands for classic liberal policies, nor is it just a vote to uphold Brazilian institutions. What’s clear even in writing this column is that there’s a very simple argument to vote for Lula. One candidate will grant permission to destroy the Amazon at high rates, and the other will actually attempt to reduce deforestation by businesses and landowners. As simple a choice as it may be, it’s really a vote to determine whether the world can breathe.

Sean Reichbach is a sophomore majoring in philosophy, politics and law.