from the Swedish institute V-Dem, the largest reference in monitoring global democracy, endorses the diagnosis regarding the accelerated movement under government.
The document recognizes the maintenance of democratic recovery in Brazil, after an episode of autocratization led by the former president. Since the failure of the 2022 coup attempt, the country has been treated by academics, politicians and the international press as a success story in resisting authoritarianism.
For the first time in history, Brazil scores better than the United States in the V-Dem indexes. The , published on Tuesday (17), demotes the American nation from the category of “liberal democracy” – the most evolved phase of this government model – to that of “electoral democracy”, where Brazil also fits.
It is the first time in 50 years that the United States has lost this status, returning to the same level observed in the early 1960s, at the height of the civil rights movement. This means that local V-Dem experts consider that, in both countries, some aspects of liberal democracies are not fully respected, such as the system of checks and balances, respect for civil liberties and the equal submission of citizens to the laws.
The relegation of the largest democracy in the world is symbolic and points to the fatigue of the liberal model that consolidated itself as the winner with the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Contrary to what Francis Fukuyama predicted in a famous article published in the late 1980s, the story had not come to an end. At the turn of the century, a new order was established, which began to confront liberalism and attract crowds.
Perhaps it was not imagined, however, that democracy in the United States would enter such an accelerated crisis. At the end of 2023, before Trump’s new election, I asked , author of “How Democracies Die”, whether American society had overestimated its democratic stability.
He answered yes and remembered two maxims of political science, proven empirically: rich democracies and old democracies never die. “By all indicators, America’s democracy should not be in crisis. No one would have guessed,” Levitsky said.
If even the Americans were surprised, there is no guarantee that Brazilian democracy is out of danger. The dissatisfactions and resentments that led to the rise of a figure like Bolsonaro were not addressed.
The debate now, in fact, revolves around how democratic or authoritarian the senator, his father’s political heir and pre-candidate for President, can be.
Recognized by his peers as the most moderate politician in the family, Flávio defends amnesty for the coup protesters of the 8th of January. In October, in response to a post by the United States Secretary of Defense on social media, he suggested that the country attack alleged drug boats in Guanabara Bay, in Rio de Janeiro, to combat “terrorist organizations.”
Whether, like his father, Flávio could one day attempt a coup is speculation. The new wave of autocratization, however, shows that a rupture is not necessary to undermine democracy little by little.
Good news is that, when a nation overcomes an episode of autocratization, in 90% of cases the levels of democracy recover or even improve in relation to previous levels. The conclusion is expected by V-Dem researchers in 2024.
This recovery, however, sometimes is not sustainable in the medium or long term. Therefore, the political situation in Brazil raises an alert.
As shown, there is record distrust towards the STF, an institution that protected democracy, and which is now involved in a serious image crisis amid the Master case.
The literature indicates that institutional distrust does not always lead to a democratic crisis – it can even result in greater political participation and accountability of public figures. But, in a scenario of serious distrust, combined with a strong affective polarization, as is the case in Brazil, the prognosis is not the best.
Meanwhile, Trump has been seeking to interfere in the country in a cascade of issues, following the tone of his new mandate.
Earlier this week, for example, the United States consul general in São Paulo suggested in a lecture that a Chinese company could not win the auction for the megaterminal at the port of Santos.
Also recently, that of Darren Beattie, Trump’s advisor who would come to the country to meet with Flávio Bolsonaro and, possibly, visit his father in jail. According to the ministry, the revocation occurred due to “omission and falsification of relevant information regarding the reason for the visit”.
In 2022, the question on which our democracy depended was: if Bolsonaro attempts a coup, will the military embark?
It is worth remembering that, in 2023, it was reported that the then American president Joe Biden had acted to guarantee the due Brazilian electoral process. It is speculated that the message that the nation would not support a coup was one of the reasons that hindered Bolsonaro’s undertaking.
Now, the questions are different. Will Trump try to interfere in the elections? How far would you be willing to go? What effect would it achieve? In itself, the circulation of these questions in the public debate reveals the degree of vulnerability of Brazilian democracy, even in the midst of its celebrated resilience.
