Less than four years ago, the then president consulted the military leadership about the possibility of reversing the results of the 2022 election, in which he emerged victorious.
In previous years, Bolsonaro had been instilling electronic awareness among voters, through a series of unfounded accusations that he disseminated in one public appearance after another.
Brazilian democracy went through a period of serious crisis —as global evidence has shown—, but, in the end, there was no coup. After the storm has passed, a new book from Laut (Center for the Analysis of Freedom and Authoritarianism), an independent and private institution, takes a step back to examine which factors allowed the advance of authoritarianism in the country and, mainly, how to reverse them.
“How to Disarm Authoritarianism in Brazil: An Agenda for Deradicalization”, published by Tinta da China Brasil, hits bookstores this Saturday (13). Thirteen researchers collaborated on the book, organized by , director of Laut and columnist for SheetFernando Romani Sales, researcher at the institute, and Lucas Petroni, professor of political science at FGV (Fundação Getúlio Vargas).
The new work is launched three years after the first book in the collection, “The Path to Autocracy”, which analyzed the ongoing democratic crisis in Brazil and the world. The researchers follow the successful formula of American political scientists and Daniel Ziblatt, who first wrote about the collapse of democracy (“How Democracies Die”, 2018) and then looked at ways to protect it (2023).
Researchers linked to Laut suggest that Bolsonaro did not emerge by chance, or as a result of the radicalization of a group of individuals, but rather as the result of old structures and institutions that once again enabled the rise of authoritarianism in the country.
For them, three vectors are fundamental to the process of de-radicalization and protection of democracy: strengthening control, affirming impartiality and guaranteeing pluralism.
The first is necessary to contain the arbitrariness of political power and institutions that act beyond democratic limits, they say. Its scope includes, for example, the limits of activity of the Armed Forces, which must be subordinated to civilian control.
The second presupposes, say the authors, that democratic legitimacy depends on the application of impersonal standards by state institutions. “When the justice system, for example, is captured by ideological loyalties and private interests, democracy loses its ability to mediate conflicts.”
The researchers cite some examples of recent failures in this foundation, such as, according to them, the partisanization of the police by Bolsonarism, the intervention of the Armed Forces in the electoral process and in the 2022 elections to try to prevent the displacement of Lula voters.
The last vector implies that deradicalization involves respect for diversity and the guarantee of a plural public sphere that enables civic participation and political contestation.
Each of the five chapters that follow the introduction puts a magnifying glass on a political “arena” that is usually the target of authoritarian attacks. They are: strength, justice, communication, association and education. The authors make a diagnosis of the vulnerabilities of each sector and suggest solutions to strengthen democracy.
In the arena of force, for example, professor at UFRJ (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro) Adriana Marques and professor at UFMG (Federal University of Minas Gerais) Lucas Rezende analyze the role of the Armed Forces and their attempts to interfere in politics.
As the main structural reform, they recommend reviewing the , often cited by coup enthusiasts as a supposed pretext for military intervention. The article defines that the Armed Forces “are intended to defend the Fatherland, guarantee constitutional powers and, at the initiative of any of these, law and order”.
“Written under the pressure of boots and in a purposefully dubious manner, the article highlights a militaristic character of Brazilian political culture (…) A constitutional reform that clarifies the subordinate role of the Armed Forces to civil power and that removes the intentional ambiguity placed in the text is essential to overcome this legacy”, write the professors.
In the concluding chapter, Mendes, Sales and Petroni make a call for action, proposing a process of democratic radicalization. For them, the attacks of January 8, 2023 show that “a purely defensive posture is insufficient when institutions are corroded from within.”
With this, the authors once again defend the deepening of structural reforms to the detriment of emergency responses, such as the doctrine of “militant democracy” applied by the Judiciary.
“Radicalizing democracy means ensuring that the Armed Forces do not have spaces for political tutelage; that the Justice system is not used for persecution; that education is a space of non-negotiable plurality; that the public communication system can distinguish facts from fake news; that religious leaders do not use their freedom as a shield to erode a culture of freedom and equality.”
