Among so many blows and coup attempts in the Republican period, Bolsonarist coup keeps traces similar to those, but at the same time has their own characteristics, which make it unique in this huge national infamy panel.
According to scholars on the subject, the most corporate profile (to preserve benefits and maintain positions) by military personnel, along with a mobilization marked by the intense use of digital networks in a conjuncture of one, as well as more robust institutions, are some of the distinctive ones, on charges of plotting the possession of (PT) after the 2022 presidential election.
As the historian Carlos Fico points out, a full professor at UFRJ (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro), in his (including attempts, including Bolsonaro) were starred by.
In the evaluation of Fico, which marks the differences between each of them is the motivation. In the proclamation of the Republic and in the subsequent coup attempts, he points out, there was a more diffuse justification of “refusing the Republic.”
“It is not known very well what this is, but the military of this early phase said that: this is not the republic we did [lá no golpe militar da Proclamação]Then you have to refund it, “he says.
During tenentism, I go on, came the phase of military activism, very associated with allegations of electoral fraud in the First Republic.
“And then, roughly, comes an anti -communist motivation phase, especially after the 1935 communist rebellion, later episodes have this ideological motivation, 37, 45 etc, until the 64 coup.”
According to the historian, the motivation of the Bolsonarist military differs because it has no ideological nature, but “much more related to the preservation of material advantages: to which they have [e que atuam politicamente para manter] and those who had in the Bolsonaro government. “
The historian and, in turn, says that if in 1964 there was a project by the military, in order to build a large Brazil, with a military industrial complex, there is no corresponding plan on the part of pockets.
“We can disagree [desse projeto]but regardless of this, they had a project for Brazil. Today they do not have. When you think of these military, there is no project, “she says, who sees Bolsonarism, in opposition, as a government guided by destruction.
Author of the work “Brazil: A Biography”, together with Lilia Schwarcz, Starling points, on the other hand, as common ingredients, between one movement and the other, the strong presence of anti -communism – which she sees almost as a caricature – and a religious appeal, which in this case would have passed from a Catholic predominance to the evangelical.
Historian and professor at the Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Odilon Caldeira Neto, says that while January 8 is marked by the repetition of patterns seen in other episodes of a coup in the Republic, this time there is also a strong influence of a global and digital far -right populism – a parallel, for example, with the attack on the United States.
“This issue of the networks was very useful strategically for scammer plans, precisely in an attempt to give a popular mobilization character and lack of organizational structure,” he says, who is coordinator of the far -right observatory.
Caldeira points out that, despite the indications of a strong structuring of the movement, many of those involved in the attacks on the Three Powers worked with the idea of “we are the people and we will take power as a true people.”
“It is a deeply populist rhetoric, from this new interesting phenomenon that is far-right populism, much influenced by the new forms [de comunicação]by the mobilizing myths. A phenomenon with historically consolidated patterns that also brings very new questions.
The historian points out, for example, that many individuals would be radicalizing not through contact with the structure of a party, a neighborhood association or some religious sector, but through one.
“There is a new type here, not only of communicational structure, but also of structure in political formation network,” says Caldeira.
A reference in the country in oral history with dictatorship military personnel, observes that the period that is most lending to one, considering the minimally similar historical context, with some democratic stability.
One difference between the two scenarios, he says, is that “there [na República de 46] The ones were explicitly divided, they were either against or in favor of the government. “
“In the case of Bolsonaro, we do not explicitly know who in the Armed Forces. This is a new fact of the Brazilian Republic, we know nothing about what our commanders think. In the republic of 46 we knew,” says D’Araújo, retired teacher at PUC-RJ and CPDOC (Center for Research and Documentation of Contemporary History of Brazil) “Geisel” and “Coup Visions”, which bring together testimonials from key figures of the dictatorship.
For D’Araújo, a relevant aspect is the strengthening of the rule of law in the country, albeit imperfect and subject to threats of the type.
“Good or bad, [hoje] We have democratic institutions, a democratic constitution. So there was no [no caso de Bolsonaro] a complete institutional adherence of several political actors. The Armed Forces themselves did not enter as an institution, and other institutions, were very active in denouncing what was happening, “he notes.
“Democracy institutions functioned in creating an unfavorable ambience of the coup, as it turned out – the blow did not come.”
I am also (UFRJ) acknowledges that it is already some advance in relation to the past the fact that for the first time in history the military had become defendants by coup. “This never really happened, and it will most likely have a conviction.”
