Project Brazil / Auditable Decision Terrain / standalone draft

可审计决策地形：
适应为什么变得理性

这版不再把 Lula、Dilma、Bolsonaro 的位置当作纯分析摆放，而是把横轴和纵轴拆成可解释指标：行政脆弱性、对抗成本，以及每个点位背后的证据轨迹。

x-axis = executive vulnerability index y-axis = confrontation cost index coordinates are auditable claim map, not statistical model
Main Figure

适应盆地不是装饰背景，而是由两个可审计指数生成的区域。

横轴衡量行政脆弱性：国会基础、支持率、丑闻/街头压力、财政空间、继任/连任压力。纵轴衡量对抗成本：市场/利率压力、国会 veto、法院风险、媒体/平台敌意、军方/农业/宗教闸门。点位仍是解释性编码，但每个编码都可回到证据表。

Auditable Decision Terrain of Accommodation A two-axis terrain showing reform window, accommodation basin, and crisis cliff based on auditable indices of executive vulnerability and confrontation cost. Decision terrain generated from auditable indices Coordinates encode index scores. The exact values remain interpretive, but the scoring components are visible below the figure. executive vulnerability index confrontation cost index 020406080100 020406080100 Reform window low vulnerability, low cost Accommodation basin bargaining is cheaper than confrontation Crisis cliff survival threatened Lula 2002market fear + weak mandate 2003 Seliccredibility purchase Mensalaocoalition shock Lula bargain Dilma 2011 2013 streets Lava Jato impeachment Bolsonaro 2018 military in govt 2022-23 rupture paths Lula / PT Dilma Bolsonaro basin Integrity note: point coordinates are auditable claim scores, not regression outputs. The table below defines each score component and source trail.
Audit Logic

坐标如何生成：两个指数，各五个组成项。

Executive vulnerability index / 行政脆弱性

横轴不是“主观脆弱感”，而是五个可追踪因素的加权综合。

Congress base
24%
Approval / streets
20%
Scandal pressure
18%
Fiscal room
22%
Election timing
16%

Confrontation cost index / 对抗成本

纵轴衡量改革政府若选择硬碰硬，需要同时承受多少制度性反击。

Market / rates
24%
Congress veto
24%
Court risk
16%
Media / platform
18%
Social vetoes
18%
Coordinate Table

点位审计表：每个案例都有可解释坐标。

Case point X vulnerability Y cost Primary evidence trail Interpretive claim Confidence
Lula 2002 25 / 100
new mandate, market distrust, coalition need		 22 / 100
market pressure high but survival risk still manageable		 2002 risk premium, exchange pressure, investor fear, PT moderation signals. Early reform space existed, but credibility purchase became rational. medium-high
2003 Selic 26.5% 46 / 100 50 / 100 Copom rate path, inflation expectations, Perry Anderson accommodation thesis. Anti-orthodox campaign enters office and buys orthodoxy to survive. high
Dilma 2013 56 / 100 66 / 100 Street protests, coalition erosion, media agenda, fiscal pressure. Policy discretion narrows as simultaneous political and social pressure rises. medium
Impeachment 95 / 100 88 / 100 Coalition collapse, Lava Jato, budget rule dispute, congressional defection. Confrontation ceases to be a policy choice and becomes survival crisis. high
Bolsonaro 2018 38 / 100 16 / 100 Anti-system mandate, initial market tolerance, military alignment. Low early confrontation cost because several veto players were incorporated. medium
2022-23 rupture 94 / 100 56 / 100 Election defeat, institutional pushback, Jan. 8, STF/TSE role, military ambiguity. System rupture raises vulnerability faster than it raises useful bargaining leverage. medium
Publication rule: every row should eventually link to source excerpts or dataset notes. Until then, the graphic should label itself as an auditable claim map, not a measured statistical terrain.