By CARLOS EDUARDO MARTINS*

The main reason for the ideological quagmire in which we live is not the presence of a Brazilian right wing that is reactive to change nor the rise of fascism, but the decision of the PT social democracy to accommodate itself to the power structures.

1.

The newspaper editorial The State of S. Paul of April 12, against amnesty for Jair Bolsonaro and the other criminals of January 8, and critical of the position taken by Tarcísio de Freitas in favor of the amnesty bill, reveals the drama of the old bourgeois oligarchy in Brazil. It does not trust Jair Bolsonaro, but without its own political leadership, it is forced to make a pact with the Workers' Party, which lends itself to the role of saving a parasitic, rentier, colonial and underdeveloped bourgeoisie.

We are in the midst of a brutal organic crisis in the reproduction of capitalism in Brazil. Brazil's per capita GDP has not grown in constant dollars since 2013, oscillating between hiccups that have not reversed the downward trend (see Cepalstat), but we are unable to offer an ideological alternative to our people.

The main reason for the ideological quagmire in which we live is not the presence of a Brazilian right wing that is reactive to change or the rise of fascism, but the decision of the PT social democracy to accommodate itself to the prevailing power structures instead of fighting for the great popular causes. It prefers to guarantee positions, salaries and remunerations in the State – which feed its party machine –, rather than to face the great social, national and democratic issues – which can threaten its immediate political stability.

The thesis that the left has no power because there are “right-wing poor people” who are the product of their conversion to the lower middle class and the fascist offensive is false. The Brazilian middle class is much more restricted and more than 70% of families receive income below the minimum wage required by DIEESE. The fascist wave exists, but it does not have all this strength and is in a crisis of leadership and organization. The root of the ideological crisis is the class capitulation of the PT, which gave up on carrying out social transformations in the country to carry out its own: becoming part of the Brazilian bourgeois elite.

In 2006, the PT social democracy had more votes than Jair Bolsonaro in 2018 and 2022, 12 or 16 years later, without the support of the two largest centrist parties at the time (PSDB and PFL), Globo network and the liberal big bourgeoisie. The conversion of classes that ideologically disarmed the Brazilian people is that of the PT elite and part of its organic militants to fractions of the bourgeoisie, in particular, the middle and small ones. It was not the supposed rise of the extremely poor to the lower middle class.

The PT's occasional and belated discovery that there is a right wing in Brazil that is resistant to social and political change, which it uses to justify its compromise with the power structures and its capitulation, is also unacceptable and reveals serious opportunistic manipulation. What can we expect from a right wing that led to the suicide of Getúlio Vargas? That attempted a coup d'état in 1961? That succeeded in achieving it in 1964? That allowed state terrorism to go unpunished through an amnesty that contravenes the Inter-American Treaty on Human Rights? That established another coup in 2016, imposing a spending cap through a constitutional amendment?

If there were a right wing in Brazil that was sensitive to social issues, the urgency of a left wing would not be so great. Its absolute necessity comes from the fact that social and political changes depend on a vanguard willing to take risks in the political, social and ideological struggle to promote the advancement of class consciousness among a people who dedicate their daily lives to survival.

2.

In Brazil today, the class struggle takes place mainly on an inter-bourgeois level between the following segments of big capital:

(i) On the one hand, the rentier class and the enlightened bourgeoisie, represented by the large Brazilian banks and the large media monopoly of Globe, associated with the political leadership of the PT social democracy and its ability to co-opt social movements, cultural and scientific figures and neutralize fascism. This alliance is contradictorily linked to liberal imperialism, represented by the Democratic Party and the multipolar forces driven by BRICS.

(ii) On the other side, there are agribusiness, extractivism, neo-Pentecostal churches and militias. In short, the great bourgeoisie of the lower clergy, but emerging due to Brazilian deindustrialization, which is associated with neo-fascism.

The first group is pushing real interest rates higher to strengthen national banks, and it is no coincidence that the deflated Selic rate was much higher under the PT governments than under the governments of Michel Temer and Jair Bolsonaro. The second group intends to promote the internationalization of finance and the dollarization of the country, is implementing brutal fiscal austerity – with cuts in social spending and operating expenses to affect all workers and public servants in education and health, who organized the most important strikes in the country in the last 15 years – and intends to expand the agricultural and extractive frontier, increasing the overexploitation of nature and workers.

These forces represent the two paths of the Brazilian tragedy. They embody distinct forms of modernization of dependence, underdevelopment and the colonial legacy that keep Brazil as a nation of excluded people and a state far below the potential that is opening up, in a multipolar world and energy transition, to continental, amphibious countries, endowed with strategic resources and a mixed-race population with immense cultural wealth and creative possibilities.

3.

In this context, it is not surprising that the PSOL minority and leaders like Glauber Braga, who are dedicated to fighting neoliberalism and fascism, are isolated and uncompromising, revealing their connections or connections. The articulation of his impeachment in the Ethics Committee of the Chamber of Deputies while Arthur Lira – who leads it, no longer in charge of the house – was traveling in Lula's presidential entourage to Japan, and the silence at the Palácio da Alvorada, are revealing of the extent of the discomfort that a combative left can cause.

However, even when defeated or defeated, its reason for existing remains a historical necessity. Win or lose, Glauber Braga remains in the suffocated history of the deep Brazil, which sooner or later may rise up, having exhausted the illusions with decadent forces and kept the flames and sparks of renewal of the popular and democratic struggle alive.

*Carlos Eduardo Martins is a professor at the Institute of International Relations and Defense (IRID) at UFRJ. Author of, among other books, Globalization, dependence and neoliberalism in Latin America (Boitempo) [https://amzn.to/3U76teO]

Originally published on Boitempo's blog.

the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE