Political analysts interpreted the collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s as a sign that it had definitively triumphed.
An article published at the time by Francis Fukuyama, entitled “The End of History?”, is the most striking illustration of this reading. In it, the political scientist wrote: “The State that emerges at the end of history is liberal, insofar as it recognizes and protects, through a legal system, man’s universal right to freedom, and democratic, insofar as it only exists with the consent of the governed.”
Thirty years later, however, liberal democracy would enter into crisis, showing that history had not ended. The world that, after being democratically elected, began to attack the system of checks and balances to maximize its power.
Specific defeats of leaders in this field, such as Donald Trump, in 2020, and , in 2022, resulted in interpretations that the institutions had resisted and that the peak of the anti-democratic onslaught had passed.
Once again, however, nothing signals that the story has come to an end. On the contrary, the elections for the European Parliament and the maintenance of Bolsonaro indicate that national populism remains strong, and its voters are regimented.
The literature suggests that authoritarianism tends to escalate as the incumbent is re-elected over and over again, a trend observed from à .
This is why academics have warned about the risks of a re-election for Bolsonaro, who is now returning to power with more extremist views.
The Republican’s victory confirms that it is possible to form a majority around a radical right-wing platform, which strengthens the speech of Bolsonaro, his close ally. Leaders like Trump, Bolsonaro and Orbán do not grow in a vacuum — they are part of the same global movement.
The federal deputy, a figure chosen by the family to interact with the international ultra-right, is an interlocutor for Trump and strategist Steve Bannon, who advised the former Brazilian president to contest the results of the elections in 2022.
The message that the United States would not support an anti-democratic attack after Bolsonaro’s defeat was one of the reasons that made it impossible for a coup attempt to proceed. It is legitimate to question whether the scenario would be different if the president at the time had been Trump, and not Trump.
The American Constitution does not prevent a convicted person from becoming President. Trump, who is being investigated under suspicion of , could take over even if he is arrested.
Bolsonaro, in contrast, and to reverse the situation. Congress, however, articulates amnesty for those involved in January 8th, and allies hope to free him. The former president may also suffer new convictions in the STF (Supreme Federal Court), which would extend his ineligibility.
More important than that is that Bolsonarism does not depend on Bolsonaro. The demand for a leader like him exists, and others will be able to take his place — be it someone from his family, like Eduardo, a young leader, like , or even an adventurer successful in inspiring voters, as he did in São Paulo.
On Tuesday night (5), political analysts highlighted that polls in the US showed that democracy was the voter’s main concern, which would be a good sign for Democrat Kamala Harris. March showed that, for 71% of Brazilians, democracy is the best form of government.
Research is not reassuring because the term can have very different meanings depending on who uses it. Those involved in January 6th in Washington DC or January 8th in Brasília can argue that they defended democracy. Leaders like Trump and Bolsonaro often use the word to justify actions that, in practice, attack the foundations of the political model itself.
Trump’s victory shows that the foundations that elected populist national figures remain firm. There is still an ongoing serious crisis of representation and discredit of institutions.
Most people feel that liberal democracy has failed and that it does not meet their demands — especially the . There are also those who identify a loss of privileges and react to advances in progressive times, such as in the USA with the consolidation of a multiracial democracy.
The fact is that the extreme right around the world, offering as a response a populist discourse that promises to protect voters from the “other” — whether the “other” is the immigrant, the left, the elite or the criminal.
The progressive camp, on the other hand, is still struggling and is unable to deliver a program and a speech that convince the electorate of the possibility of a better future. The story is far from over.
