By LUIZ MARQUES*
The Bolsonarist epic associates the typical crimes of the primitive accumulation of capital with a sociopathic personality, for the civilizational regression
In ancient times, the prevailing conception of historical experience was one of alternating successive successions of glory and disaster. This was a sign for the victor to never boast of his achievements out of arrogance, ruthlessness or revenge. It was better to reflect at each moment and circumstance on the opposite of fortune: misfortune. History oscillates like a seesaw, sometimes rising and sometimes falling according to a natural law. It was easy to predict the future by inference from the past. All you had to do was look back.
Now for those who wrote the first one Biblical Testament Only the Lord can reveal the future through his prophets, regardless of the past. Only the Almighty knows what is yet to happen. Jews and Christians are interested in salvation; a divine gift dependent on faith and personal conduct. The reward may come later. As the saying goes, the future belongs to God.
Modernly, history is perceived as a stage for disputes decided by virtue of the actors. The subjects of events for good or evil; to preserve or modify the status quo. The path is made by walking, inch by inch. The price for defining one's destiny is to assume full responsibility for the unexpected consequences of one's own actions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
See Ruy Barbosa, appointed Minister of Finance and Justice of the Republic of Brazil in 1889. He was a vigilant advocate of public morality by incinerating documents that revealed the origin of each slave. This was the way he found to avoid the compensation demanded by the elites for the loss of “property” during the Abolition of Slavery. They had no records to prove it. In return, the ethnic origin of the freed slaves was turned to ashes; Afro-descendants lost all memory of their ancestors. “The history of the world is the court of the world”; a court that judges and condemns according to the consequences.
illiberal democracy
The unspeakable recites the slogan “Brazil above all. God above all”. But the leading role in the coup against the rule of law, with the investigation by the Federal Police formalized by the Attorney General's Office (PGR), attests to his involvement in serving private interests and those of the family; not the demands of Brazil or God. The Bolsonarist epic associates the typical crimes of the primitive accumulation of capital with a sociopathic personality, for the regression of civilization. However, punishment knocks at the door. “Nothing like one day going after the other coming,” celebrates the poet.
Bolsonarism is born from the rib of Trumpism; the salute to the American flag speaks for itself. Today, neoliberalism goes hand in hand with neofascism to implement “illiberal democracy,” in the words of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán when presenting his governance project for Hungary. The difference is that Donald Trump acts with grandiose purposes in view of the United States (America First); not to destroy the nation. Benjamin Netanyahu relies on futurism and religious nationalism. “You will summon peoples you have not known, nations that did not know you will run to you, because of the Lord your God and the Holy One of Israel who will be your glory” (Isaiah 54:5). The victims are witnesses.
Trumpism, which sounds like “national capitalism,” does not prevent the concentration of wealth. The economic stagnation of Reaganism frustrates the dream of prosperity. For centrists, this is not the end of the post-war cycle, generated in the State with the “social democratic revolution.” The program would not be complete. The model of democratic socialism, tested until the 1970s, could develop on a global scale now. To the gullible, apologies. It is not credible that the mass uprising against financial rentierism and the climate catastrophe will rescue a pact of industrial society signed between the classes under the ideology of valuing work, and not precariousness and outsourcing.
More realistic are left-wing intellectuals who welcome an anti-fascist and anti-capitalist vision. “It is not a limitation, but rather a fundamental condition for understanding the logic of reactionary authoritarianism, as well as for thinking about ways to combat it,” stresses Michael Löwy, in an article recent on the site the earth is round. Radical changes need to be inspired by the founding revolts of direct and participatory democracy, driving “councils”, “soviets”, and “communes”.
Question of method
As Györg Lukács observes, in History and class consciousness: “Orthodox Marxism does not mean an uncritical adherence to the results of Marx’s research, nor does it mean a ‘faith’ in one or another thesis, nor the exegesis of a ‘sacred’ book. Orthodoxy in Marxism concerns itself exclusively with the method”. The end of the adventure remains unknown, although some see in Marxism relevant scientific elements, eschatological in its framework, prophetic in its attitude.
The truth is that the theoretical-methodological options of analysis matter more than the projections on a finish or a telos for time. The philosophy of history that replaces the theology of history maintains, in common, the concern with transporting the golden age of the mythological past to a teleological or eschatological future. The problem is that it does not capture the doubt present in the new mentality.
That Greek historians describe history centered on notable events is indisputable. That priests based on Hebrew prophecies focus on supra-historical events, creation, and incarnation, is an ancient habit. That the secularization of theological principles allows them to be applied to a greater number of empirical facts is verifiable. The contribution of moderns consists in putting everything in a blender, with suspicion. “Suspicion” is the method bequeathed by Marx, Nietzsche, and Freud to go beyond the appearances adopted by society, culture, and individuals, respectively.
Deciphering the future with calculations or resorting to fortune telling clashes with the freedom to risk inventive solutions in the reconstruction of the world, which contemporary reason is capable of conceiving through political praxis. It is to carry out the prior holocaust of free will, which is undesirable and implausible. The participation of parties, movements and social classes is what exists in concrete terms. Emancipation through individual and collective self-development is a possibility, as opposed to determinism. There are no certainties. The struggle decides who are the virtuous, of the time. But history remains open.
* Luiz Marquesis a professor of political science at UFRGS. He was Rio Grande do Sul's state secretary of culture in the Olívio Dutra government.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
