By JOSE VICTOR FERRO & VICTOR HENRIQUE SANCHES
Pablo Marçal's unusual methods have recently drawn comparisons with historical figures from São Paulo and national politics
1.
After the end of the municipal elections in São Paulo, the big winner of the election is clear. In fact, although at first glance it may seem like a contradiction, he did not even make it to the second round. The official candidate, Ricardo Nunes (MDB), managed to be reelected with ease, but the big winner of the São Paulo election was undoubtedly coach e an influencer Pablo Marcal.
Without any television time or party machinery behind him – running for the tiny and irrelevant PRTB – Pablo Marçal achieved a meteoric rise, reaching the mark of more than 1,7 million votes in the capital of São Paulo. The candidate was approximately 56 thousand votes behind the second-placed candidate in the election, Guilherme Boulos (PSOL), a difference that left him out of the second round. Such achievements position him not only as a strong candidate for the legislature, but even as a possible contender for the presidency of the Republic in 2026.
Despite the apparent novelty of such a personality, Pablo Marçal's unusual methods – not to mention unscrupulous and dishonest – have recently drawn comparisons with historical figures from São Paulo and national politics. In a recent interview with the program Roda Viva on TV Culture, Maria Hermínia Tavares recalled that in the same way that Pablo Marçal is currently viewed with dismay and surprise, in the 1950s and 1960s, the meteoric rise of another equally histrionic and performative figure was seen, a primary school teacher who came from Catholic unionism, whose name – Jânio da Silva Quadros – would be marked in national history.
Popularly, eccentricity and modus operandi The unorthodox political character of both earned them the label of populist. In fact, in São Paulo politics, such a nickname is not uncommon and has seen many of its historical figures characterized in the same way. In addition to the aforementioned Jânio Quadros, São Paulo populism has had names of singular importance in recent political history – such as former mayors Paulo Maluf and Celso Pitta – and in distant times – such as former governor and federal interventor Adhemar de Barros. However, given this history and the emergence of Pablo Marçal, the question arises: is Pablo Marçal an heir to the tradition of São Paulo populism? Despite his apparent novelty, are we simply facing an updated manifestation of a political phenomenon that has long been known and debated?
2.
To answer this enigma, first, it is inevitable to try to find what is common in such diverse names as those mentioned above – some of them, such as Jânio Quadros and Adhemar de Barros, political adversaries in their time. In other words, what do we call São Paulo populism here?
To this end, it seems essential to us to revisit the texts of Francisco Weffort. In them, the concept of populism appears as a way of characterizing the impacts of the unprecedented entry of the “popular masses” into Brazilian political life, following the democratization of 1945. In general, at that time, through the expansion of suffrage, the institutional conditions were established that allowed the popular classes to exert, through voting, effective pressure, albeit in a limited and indirect way, on the power relations between the economic and political elites.
However, popular participation continued to be fundamentally distant from traditional parties and organizations, such as unions and student associations. Given this inability of popular penetration by parties and associations, mass participation in democratic politics manifested itself as a direct relationship between voters and candidates, which was expressed by the periodic emergence of demagogic politicians. In the case of São Paulo, figures such as Adhemar de Barros and Jânio Quadros stand out, who, although political adversaries, should be understood as manifestations of the same grassroots phenomenon.
Although Francisco Weffort's theses have been revised over the last few decades, with emphasis on the works of Jorge Ferreira, Antônio Lavareda, Angela de Castro Gomes and Daniel Aarão Reis Filho, it seems to us that the late USP professor continues to give us some clues about how electoral politics works in the city of São Paulo.
That is to say, its formula, which combines the fragility of a party system impervious to popular participation and the emergence of figures sui generis who establish a charismatic bond with the population, seems more than alive when we come across someone like Pablo Marçal: an “anti-politics” politician, candidate for an insignificant party (in a terrain where the political party order of the New Republic seems already dead and buried), and who has as his trump card his direct connection with the electorate.
However, Pablo Marçal's similarities with the “historical populists” of São Paulo end there. In later studies on adhemarism and janism, such as those by Paulo Fontes and Adriano Duarte, it was demonstrated that the populist phenomenon of that period was based on a complex network of sociabilities and interpersonal relationships at the local level, in the various neighborhoods of the capital of São Paulo, manifesting itself in the formation of networks of exchange of favors and benefits.
Thus, beyond a relationship built solely through the charisma of these figures and their direct connection with the masses, what was most significant and guaranteed the success of political leaders such as Jânio and Adhemar – and later Maluf – was the vast and dense network of relationships established in spaces such as sub-police stations, among block inspectors, in football clubs, in dance organizations, in cultural associations and in neighborhood friendship societies, among others. Later, once the elections were won, these local relationships translated into privileged access to power and the State and in the return of votes through the targeting of public policies to these regions.
Our point is that 20th century populism is based not only on a relationship between charismatic leaders and the voting public in an environment of fragile political parties and institutions, but, above all, on a relationship established between the population, the leader and the state apparatus. The latter was used in the formation and consolidation of networks of exchange of favors and political patronage, translating, in political practice, an ideological environment of “faith” in the state; or what Francisco Weffort himself called “fascination with the state”. It is therefore impossible to think about the populists of yesteryear without considering their relationship with the public machine.
Furthermore, in the case of São Paulo, the weight of the state and public administration is not only present in the way politics is done, but also in a common program of its representatives. In fact, from Adhemar to Maluf and Pitta – with Janista moralism as a deviant case in terms of agenda – it is possible to find a similar political agenda.
First, there is what Boris Fausto called “politics of efficiency,” symbolically immortalized in the saying “he steals, but he gets things done” and effectively implemented in major public works. Second, there is welfare as a matrix of social policy to combat poverty and inequality. Lastly, there is the so-called “punitive populism,” which basically calls for an iron fist policy—immortalized in Paulo Maluf’s slogan “put the route on the streets”—and severe punishments for criminals as a way to combat all types of crime.
3.
Once again, these three traits point to the clear responsibility of public administration for the common good, which clashes head-on with Pablo Marçal’s agenda. In fact, it is possible to find a certain continuity with this program in the last municipal election not in Marçal but in José Luiz Datena (PSDB), a representative in particular of “punitive populism,” but who also does not deny the importance of the social function of the State. Likewise, Datena also created a direct link with the popular classes through his daily appearance on his newscast, mobilizing an appealing rhetoric by galvanizing all popular indignation in the face of heinous crimes – summarized in his slogan “chain them up.”
Although he uses classic populist strategies, especially at the discursive level, Pablo Marçal could not be more out of step with his predecessors from São Paulo when it comes to his relationship with the State. Unlike a mayor who would try to use the State to improve the lives of citizens, Pablo Marçal presents himself as the candidate of those who think that the best mayor is a mayor who does not actually exist.
In this ideology, it is up to the “self-governing citizen” (the expression is found in Pablo Marçal’s government plan) to prosper and improve his or her living conditions in the metropolis. In this sense, although he shares characteristics of political style with names such as Jânio Quadros, we believe that Pablo Marçal can even be considered a populist, but as a new type of populist, who symbolizes a break with the historical São Paulo populists and not a continuity.
However, if our thesis is correct, it remains to understand the success of coach in regions of the city and layers of the population that traditionally constituted the electoral bases of traditional populists, who generally sought a close relationship with the State to improve their lives. In this regard, we have the impression that the concept of “aspirational classes”, proposed by anthropologist Rosana Pinheiro-Machado, can offer us some explanations in this regard.
The fact is that the working classes in the north and east of São Paulo, due to the even more brutal inequality prior to the certain social inclusion of the 2000s, inevitably depended on welfare policies and more direct intervention by the public administration. After the PT's economic “anti-miracle,” which combined economic growth with a certain income distribution – unlike the military miracle, as economist Fernando Rugitsky observes –, these classes have seen a palpable social improvement and, in the wake of this progression, they individually aspire to continue improving.
As Pinheiro-Machado points out, after this moment of inclusion through consumption, these classes increasingly begin to see private property as the crowning achievement of their success. This, in turn, is seen as the fruit of their individual effort and hard work. It is in this type of subjective state that Bolsonarism and Pablo Marçal himself find fertile ground with his “entrepreneurship to prosper” and “unlock wealth” manual.
By way of conclusion, if we return once again to the most regrettable scene of this year's election – the chair-throwing – we can see a highly symbolic gesture. In short, we see the possible missing link of São Paulo populism (Datena) trying, in a desperate and irrational attitude, to win back the classes he previously represented. In the end, his gesture is in vain, because these classes, now not entirely at the mercy of the State after the brief period of inclusion by the PT governments, now have a representative who is much more legitimate to their current material conditions and subjective aspirations. In other words, the social base that supported São Paulo populism is no longer the same, giving way to a new type of charismatic representative, shaped in the image and likeness of their self-representations and current demands.
*Jose Victor Ferro holds a master's degree in Latin American studies from the universities of Salamanca, Stockholm and Paris 3-Sorbonne Nouvelle.
*Vitor Henrique Sanches is a master's student at the University of Paris 1- Panthéon-Sorbonne.
References
DUARTE, Adriano Luiz; FONTES, Paulo. “Populism Seen from the Periphery: Adhemarism and Janism in the Neighborhoods of Mooca and São Miguel Paulista, 1947-1953”. AEL Cad., v.11, n.20/21. 2007.
FAUSTO, Boris. “Paulista populism”. Folha de São Paulo. July 22, 2002. Available at: https://www1.folha.uol.com.br/fsp/opiniao/fz2207200207.htm
FERREIRA, Jorge. “The name and the thing: populism in Brazilian politics”. in Jorge Ferreira. populism and its history: debate and criticism. Rio de Janeiro: Brazilian Civilization, 2001.
GOMES, Angela Castro. The invention of laborism. Rio de Janeiro: FGV Editora, 2005 (1st ed. 1988).
LAVAREDA, Antonio. Democracy at the polls: the Brazilian party-electoral process (1945-1964). Rio de Janeiro: Editora Revan, 1991.
MUSSI, Daniela; CRUZ, André Kaysel Velasco e. “The Populisms of Francisco Weffort”. Brazilian Journal of Social Sciences, v. 35, n. 104, p. e3510409, 2020.
PINHEIRO-MACHADO, Rosana. “What Lula gave and Bolsonaro took”. El País Brasil. June 21, 2021. Available at: https://brasil.elpais.com/opiniao/2021-06-21/o-que-lula-deu-e-bolsonaro-abocanhou.html
REIS FILHO, Daniel Aarão. (2001), “The collapse of the collapse of populism”, in Jorge Ferreira. The populism and its history: debate and criticism. Rio de Janeiro: Brazilian Civilization, 2001.
RUGITSKY, Fernando. “Miracle, mirage, anti-miracle: the political economy of the Lula governments and the roots of the current crisis”. February Magazine, v. 9, p. 40-50, 2016.
WEFFORT, Francis. Populism in Brazilian politics. São Paulo: Paz e Terra, 2003.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
