Fernando Alcoforado*
The main political events of Brazil have presented in the moments of deep crisis throughout history as the main characteristic the conciliation between the representative political forces of the ruling classes with the maintenance of the economic and social status quo as happened with the Independence of the Country in 1822, the Proclamation of the Republic in 1889 and the end of the Oligarchic Republic in 1930. The conciliation between the representative political forces of the ruling classes can assume two characteristics, according to the Italian philosopher Antonio Gramsci: 1) passive revolution; and 2) counter-reform [COUTINHO, Carlos Nelson. Revolução passiva ou contrarreforma? (Passive revolution or counter-reform?) Available at the website <http://www.acessa.com/gramsci/?page=visualizar&id=790>].
Unlike a popular “Jacobin” revolution, such as the French 1789, Russian 1917, Chinese 1949, and Cuban 1959 revolutions carried out by the people by breaking down the dominant power by radically breaking with the old political, economic and social order, a passive revolution always implies the presence of two moments: that of “restoration” (it is always a conservative reaction against the possibility of an effective and radical transformation from “below”, that is, a popular revolution) and “renewal” (in which some of the popular demands are met through “concessions” from the ruling strata).
In Brazil, the 1964 coup d’état was a passive revolution based on “restoration” because it was a counterrevolution, that is, a conservative reaction to the possibility of an effective and radical transformation from “below” during the João Goulart administration. The end of the Oligarchic Republic in 1930, for example, was a passive revolution based on “renewal” in which some of the popular demands were met by the ruling classes, such as the social laws introduced by the Getúlio Vargas government that represented “concessions” to subordinate social strata, besides contributing to the advance of capitalism in Brazil.
As for the counter-reform, Gramsci characterizes it as a pure “restoration” of a political, economic and social order that eliminates obstacles to the development of capitalism, such as the “restoration” of liberalism now with new elements. The passive revolution acts towards the “restoration” of a political, economic and social order by acting to prevent, for example, a social revolution. In the counter-reform, there is a “combination of old and new,” that is, liberalism that has come to operate globally.
The Welfare State, for example, introduced in several Western European countries after World War II, was a passive revolution with the introduction of social democracy that had the moment of restoration by barring the possibilities of successful of socialist revolution and the moment of renewal by adopting the interventionist economic policies suggested by Keynes and by accommodating many of the demands of the working classes. In turn, the counter-reform has as an example the neoliberalism that was introduced in the world economy, including Brazil, from the 1990s to enable the return of the old liberalism, which was previously limited to each country, to operate on the world level.
In the neoliberal era in which we live there is no space for the advancement of social rights. On the contrary, there is the elimination of such rights and the deconstruction and denial of the reforms already achieved by the subordinate classes. So-called “reforms” of social security, labor protection laws, privatization of public enterprises, etc. – “reforms” that are currently present on the political agenda of both central and peripheral capitalist countries, such as Brazil, aim at the pure and simple restoration of the conditions proper to a “savage” capitalism, in which market laws must be applied without restriction.
After the passive revolution based on the “restoration” carried out by the military regime from 1964 to 1985, the economic policy adopted by the Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Lula and Dilma Rousseff governments represented a mix of passive revolution based on “renewal” and counter-reform. With the passive revolution based on “renewal” some popular demands were met by the ruling classes, such as cash transfer programs such as Bolsa Familia. The counter-reform was characterized by the introduction of neoliberalism which resulted in the elimination of some social rights, the deconstruction and denial of the reforms already achieved by the subordinate classes, the privatization of public enterprises, etc.
Brazil, more than any other country in Latin America, can be characterized as the quintessential place of passive revolution and counter-reform. Independence of Brazil differed from the experience of other Latin American countries because it did not have the characteristics of a typical national-liberatory revolutionary process because it was aborted, in the Brazilian case, by the episode of the Portuguese royal family’s transmigration to Brazil, when the Colony received the structure and frameworks of the Portuguese metropolitan state.
Revolutionary nativism, under the influence of the ideals of liberalism and the great revolutions of the late eighteenth century, gave way in Brazil to the logic of to keep and to change that still prevails today, with the initiative of D. Pedro I, Crown Prince of the Portuguese Royal House, and not to the Brazilian people the political act that culminated with Independence. Brazil’s independence was therefore a “revolution without revolution” because there were no changes in the nation’s economic base and political and legal superstructures. The State born of Independence maintains the execrable landholding and intensifies the no less execrable slavery by making it the support of restoration of the economic structures inherited from the Colony.
Brazil was the last country in the world to end slavery in the nineteenth century, land reform is yet to be realized because the landlord-based agrarian structure still exists in Brazil, currently modernized with agribusiness, and the process of industrialization was introduced late in Brazil, 200 years after the Industrial Revolution in England. This explains Brazil’s economic backwardness relative to more developed countries. The economic crises faced by Brazil throughout its history have not been able to generate political crises that would lead the Brazilian people to the “Jacobin” social revolution and put in check the economic system and the holders of power to promote their economic and social development.
Despite the numerous popular uprisings recorded throughout the history of Brazil, a true political, economic and social revolution capable of making profound structural changes and promoting development for the benefit of the Brazilian population has never actually happened in Brazil. All the revolutionary attempts made in Brazil were aborted with harsh repression by the holders of power. It is well known that, in the world, the countries that have advanced politically are those whose peoples have been protagonists, through social revolutions, the changes made in the economic and social planes.
At the current juncture, the country is moving swiftly towards economic and political collapse with the nefarious Bolsonaro government, which is making a mix of passive “restoration” revolution, aimed at maintaining the privileges of the ruling classes and promoting setbacks in the social realm, and of counter-reform by deepening neoliberalism to the detriment of the interests of its population and Brazil. The passive revolution based on the “restoration” associated with the counter-reform is a conservative reaction to the possibility of an effective and radical transformation of Brazil that corresponds to the will of the vast majority of the Brazilian population. The critical political, economic and social situation in which Brazil is currently facing may also cause social upheaval that may abort the passive and counter-reform revolution and result in a Jacobin or popular revolution in Brazil.
* Fernando Alcoforado, 79, awarded the medal of Engineering Merit of the CONFEA / CREA System, member of the Bahia Academy of Education, engineer and doctor in Territorial Planning and Regional Development by the University of Barcelona, university professor and consultant in the areas of strategic planning, business planning, regional planning and planning of energy systems, is author of the books Globalização (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1997), De Collor a FHC- O Brasil e a Nova (Des)ordem Mundial (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1998), Um Projeto para o Brasil (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2000), Os condicionantes do desenvolvimento do Estado da Bahia (Tese de doutorado. Universidade de Barcelona,http://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/1944, 2003), Globalização e Desenvolvimento (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2006), Bahia- Desenvolvimento do Século XVI ao Século XX e Objetivos Estratégicos na Era Contemporânea (EGBA, Salvador, 2008), The Necessary Conditions of the Economic and Social Development- The Case of the State of Bahia (VDM Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2010), Aquecimento Global e Catástrofe Planetária (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, 2010), Amazônia Sustentável- Para o progresso do Brasil e combate ao aquecimento global (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, 2011), Os Fatores Condicionantes do Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2012), Energia no Mundo e no Brasil- Energia e Mudança Climática Catastrófica no Século XXI (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2015), As Grandes Revoluções Científicas, Econômicas e Sociais que Mudaram o Mundo (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2016), A Invenção de um novo Brasil (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2017), Esquerda x Direita e a sua convergência (Associação Baiana de Imprensa, Salvador, 2018, em co-autoria) and Como inventar o futuro para mudar o mundo (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2019).
Site Title 