|
Brazilian Populism： Good for Politicians， Bad for the Poor Written by Augusto Zimmermann Friday， 06 February 2009 06：57 Populism reflects the rhetorical style of political leaders who claim to govern directly for the people. In the context of Latin America， populism can therefore be used to describe "mass-popular movements... based on an emotive call... and often organized around a single charismatic leader". As the political theorist Carlos Alberto Montaner puts it： Populism is an ideological trend and a form of governance that amalgamates all the errors and political vices blithely practiced by Latin Americans throughout the 20th century： strong-man rule， patronage， statism， collectivism and anti-Americanism." Politicians whose view can be described as populist wish their people to regard them as endowed with real or imaginary attributes of goodness， generosity， courage， and concern for the poor. These are politicians who pretend to speak for the people even though， as the late historian José Honório Rodrigues observed， socio-economic problems in Brazil have been aggravated by such "false leaders of the agitator type， restless and dominated by feelings of shame and guilt." During the colonial period， the Portuguese Crown was largely dependent on the landed aristocracy for the development of Brazil's economy and for its military security. Landowners administered justice across their lands and possessed their own private militias for the purposes of maintaining public order. Being independent of the law， they became paternal protectors of the population surrounding their homes. Hence， as history professor Márcio Valen·a points out， "a patron-client relationship was based on mutual exchange and the expectation of both sides that it would provide future yields. The patr·o provided resources， protection and links to the outside world... The "client" offered support and obedience... The patron-client system depended on the interaction between individuals and favoured informal flexible relationships". With the fall of the Brazilian Empire on 15 November 1889， local rural bosses became the mediators between citizens and the government. These local bosses maintained their traditional power by demanding the personal loyalty of those under their paternal protection. The economic security and social well being of individuals flowed directly from their bosses' personal dominion. There was indeed a certain sense of noblesse oblige on their part， with their vassals developing an attitude of personal loyalty to them. As the late American anthropologist Charles Wagley explained： Frequently the local political boss， the coronel was a sort of patr·o to his followers， who received favors and expected future favors. A lower-class worker without a patr·o of the kind or another was a man without a protector in time of need. The patr·o provided some measure of social security - generally the only form available to the worker. An important text for those interested in understanding， in detail， the role played by the political boss in Brazilian society， and in particular the way political power has been exercised since the beginnings of Brazil's colonization， is the classic text， Os Donos do Poder (The Owners of Power) written in 1957 by the late Brazilian jurist Raymundo Faoro. In one of the last and most important paragraphs of this seminal book， Faoro provides a general explanation of why personal power is of such significance in Brazil： "The chief protects particular interests， grants privileges and incentives， and distribute jobs and benefits. It is expected that he will make justice without any attention to objective and impersonal rules. In the person of the sovereign is concentrated all the hopes of the rich and the poor， because the state is the centre of all power in Brazilian society... The chief is not subject to the landed aristocracy or the bourgeoisie. He governs... directly over the nation. "He speaks directly to his people， not intermediaries... He is the people's father， not... a legal and constitutional ruler. He is the good prince who... carries out welfare-state policies in order to guarantee the support of the masses. To avoid any [real] popular participation， he often appeals to street mobilizations； public rallies where the only thing left behind are the dust of his meaningless words. "As the son of state providentialism， he strengthens the state power by using all the means this [statist] tradition offers. In extreme cases， he will become the social dictator of a socialistic type， who satisfies popular aspirations by calming down the people with bread and circus." The process of industrialization initiated in the 1930s created a large urban class which developed apart from the old influence of the landed aristocracy. This period of internal migration saw political power transferred from a landed oligarchy to urban political leaders. The rise of populism is identified as a by-product of that industrialization process emerging on the political scene when the popular masses migrated to the urban centres in search of new opportunities. However， all this change of socio-economic structure did not modify traditional patterns of behaviour， since those who moved from the countryside to the cities preserved the tendency to view all relationships， including those with public officials， in personal rather than impersonal (legal) terms. In other words， those in power were still expected to be "generous" towards supporters and personal acquaintances. The first political leader to capitalise on the preservation of the political mind-set inherited from the countryside was Getúlio Vargas， a prosperous caudillo (rural oligarch). In 1937， he masterminded a coup that installed the Estado Novo (New State)， a populist dictatorship where he assumed the role of paternal ruler who directly appealed to the popular masses as their supreme ruler and benefactor. As Joseph Page points out： "Upon assuming the presidency after the revolution of 1930， he set about creating a relationship of dependency not only between government and private enterprise... but also between government and labor. This relationship turned out to be a mirror image of the traditional tie between haves and have-nots in rural Brazil. "Peasants who moved to the cities encountered a social structure quite different from the one to which they were accustomed. They have to live in amorphous slums and， as Brazil industrialized， to toil in impersonal workplaces. Thus it was easy for Vargas to substitute the government as the authority figure that would take care of the needs of employees， just as the landlord had done in the countryside. Curiously， Vargas was a lawyer and landowner who began his political career with the support of other rural oligarchs from his native Rio Grande do Sul. But he was wise enough to perceive that the urbanization process would dramatically reduce the power of landowners. Originally， however， as the political philosopher and former Brazilian ambassador J.O. de Meira Penna explains： "Vargas was linked mostly to the landlords of his own state， whose interests he continued defending even after he had turned into a populist rabble-rouser. Just after the 1930 "revolution"， one of his young followers， Lindolfo Collor， suggested the introduction of a new labor law... Vargas accepted Collor's ideas with misgivings： "Let's hope this little German will not cause us too much trouble"... But then he understood that the new labor and social welfare laws were copied from the Italian fascist Carta del Lavoro， keeping labor unions strictly under the thumb of the Ministry of Labor in his own government. Thus， the proletarian masses could eventually be mobilized to his advantage..."
Vargas constructed around himself the image of a paternal ruler modelled on the pater familias. He posed as the great "father" of the working classes， expecting absolute loyalty from them to such an extent that， from 1937 to 1945， laws were little more than a tool for the imposition of his personal will. In fact， Vargas was virtually free to instruct public authorities to kill， arrest， and torture anyone he wished. After visiting the country in 1938， a famous political scientist， Karl Loewenstein， wrote that the greatest asset of the Brazilian dictatorship was the dictator himself， who， as he put it， carried the regime "on his shoulders"： "The dictatorship is personalistic in character. In that， it is altogether different from the European totalitarian pattern. No government party protects it， and no coercive ideology supports it. The regime rests on no visible props， except the army； it is based on the popularity of one man alone." Even since， some of the most successful Brazilian politicians have been proud "disciples" of Vargas. They admire the former dictator for his "progressive" policies of national-statism and welfare-state labourism， which are also very appreciated by voters who wait expectantly for a "saviour" to inaugurate a "tropical paradise" in Brazil. These voters rationalise： "Vargas was a dictator but for us he was good". Or， as one worker put it： "I never permitted anyone to say anything bad about Vargas... I knew that he always gave us benefits， my work papers... I thought， I am a worker， and he has given me so many benefits". According to the Brazilian sociologist Maria Lucia Victor Barbosa， populism is strong in the country because many Brazilians "make a more emotional reading of the world"， so that they are also keen to accept demagogical promises of "messianic nature". This undemocratic aspect of Brazilian society might explain the results of a survey conducted by the United Nations which found in 2004 that only 30.6% of Brazilians regard themselves as democrats. The survey may reflect nostalgic feelings for previous "benevolent" dictatorships. Its results could have been worse had those who answered favourably to the idea of democracy been asked to explain what they mean by it. Due to the nature of Brazilian society， many Brazilians associate democracy with majority will but not with the rule of law. Indeed， the whole process of "mass mobilization" tends toward the personification of power， isolating the supposedly "democratic" power of demagogic-populist leaders from the rule of law. As a result， under the current populist government of President Lula da Silva， corruption has reached unprecedented levels. The Lula administration is responsible for the biggest series of corruption scandals in the country's history. According to James Petras， a left-wing sociology professor and expert on Brazilian politics， "every sector of Lula's Workers' Party (PT) has been implicated in bribery， fraud， vote buying， theft of public funds， failure to report illicit campaign financing， and a host of other felonious behaviour". The fact that President Lula remains so popular in the midst of so many scandals involving hundreds of millions of US dollars should come as no surprise to those familiar with the political workings of Brazil. For instance， the Government has spent millions of dollars on political propaganda. While such propaganda does nothing to reduce social problems， it serves to boost the President's charismatic image as "a former factory worker with no university degree who speaks to his people as one of them". Support to the government is also obtained from the fact that the federal administration has employed within the state machinery thousands of members and supporters of the ruling PT party. A large number of party cadres， including trade union leaders， have been appointed to high positions in the government. This is so common place that a retired Supreme Court chief justice， Maurício Corrêa， has denounced that even the most highly technical jobs are going to unqualified party members， who nonetheless pay the party a levy constituting up to 20% of their salaries. Another example of populism taking place involves the distribution of money to families in the form of a supposed anti-poverty programme called Bolsa Família (family fund). This programme is controlled by the federal government and provides direct cash to millions of Brazilians， roughly a fifth of the country's population. Such "generosity" offers no real solution for the problem of poverty， although it encourages the poor to regard President Lula as a "generous" paternal leader and provider. Unfortunately， demagogic governmental programmes such as the Bolsa Família end up aggravating the excess in government bureaucracy and spending， which is actually one of the reasons that public debt， taxes and interest rates are so high in Brazil， with its government claiming an estimated 40% of GDP in the form of taxes and contributions. In Brazil， taxation to subsidise government expanding is overwhelming and the amount of red tape confronted at all levels of government is simply enormous. According to the 2008 Index of Economic Freedom， "starting a business in Brazil takes more than three times the world average of 43 days， and obtaining a business license takes more than the global average of 234 days". (1) Finally， "inflexible employment regulations"， which is another problem that populism certainly aggravates， is found to have created "a risk aversion for companies that would otherwise hire more people and grow". (1) Miles， Marc A. et al； 2006 Index of Economic Freedom. The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal， 2006， p.120 Augusto Zimmermann， LLB， LLM， PhD is a Lecturer in Law at Murdoch University， Western Australia. Set as favorite Bookmark Email This Hits： 686 Comments (11) Subscribe to this comment's feed ... written by Jo·o da Silva， February 06， 2009 As usual， a very good article by Zimmermann. Rich in historical facts that are incontestable. He hit the nail on the spot with the following comments of his： Finally， "inflexible employment regulations"， which is another problem that populism certainly aggravates， is found to have created "a risk aversion for companies that would otherwise hire more people and grow". Unfortunately the "Populism" is going to aggravate many more problems in the next few years. Only a small minority of outspoken Brazilians like Zimmermann have the guts to say it openly. My hats off to Zimmermann. Now I look forward to the comments of our esteemed fellow bloggers like Lord Augustus to take up the debate further. Right Joao ！ written by ch.c.， February 07， 2009 but when Ch.c. criticizes the general South American POPULISM， and Brazil in particular but because this is mostly a site on Brazil， I am insulted by many people (not necessarily you Joao) Your comments are right to the point ！ In my country， one of the wealthiest and most developed， we have MUCH LESS workers rights and protection in our laws， than most emerging nations and even most EU nations such as France， Italy， Germany and Spain. Meaning foreign companies have an added reason to set up shop here. They get - a centrally located country - top infrastructure， in roads， rails and airports - skilled workforce - Low bureaucraty - pleasant living environment - acceptable corporate tax rate - efficient banking system for cash management， trade financing， forex dealings for corporations currencies and commodities hedges， etc - low employers social charges for their employees (here around 15 % of employees salaries including pensions fund sharing costs - France over 55 %...for example) - top healthcare - the lowest workers protection cost of all the EU for laying them off (the law says 3 months salaries... and then eventually plus...whatever employers give as their own gesture...but not obliged) And we still end up with the lowest unemployment rate， good unemployment benefits， and much higher than average salaries when employed even compared to the EU. And just for Joao.....as I stated in another thread， watch out next week news and articles on my country， after this week end votation ！ Laughs
Ch.C written by Jo·o da Silva， February 07， 2009 but when Ch.c. criticizes the general South American POPULISM， and Brazil in particular but because this is mostly a site on Brazil， I am insulted by many people (not necessarily you Joao) You get insulted ， because you are not a Brasilian.BUT... BUT Zimmermann is and he knows the Brasilian history as much as or more than I do. He， you and many other sane Brasilians understand that for any business to generate jobs and prosperity， they have to have favorable conditions with right sort of controls legislated by competent wings of the government.However， when the government indulges in populism (barato) like Vargas did， a country stops in space and time. And just for Joao.....as I stated in another thread， watch out next week news and articles on my country， after this week end votation ！ Laughs You mentioned about it and I hope you guys stay out of EU. I am not a big fan of Sarko nor Angela M (You must have discovered by now). Anyway， I am glad that you enjoyed Zimmermann′s article. Hope our good friend Augustus Severus gets to read it. (Do you think that Augustus and Augusto Zimmermann are the same· ). If so， it would be fun. Joao written by ch.c.， February 09， 2009 Our votation was not to stay in or out of the EU. On this votation， 60 % said yessss. The subject was if yes or no we should allow 2 Eastern European countries (newer EU members)rights for their citizens to WORK in our country ！ And on your above arguments "when the government indulges in populism (barato) like Vargas did"...why are you not saying.... as Robbing Hook does · Hmmm This was just a reference to the other thread when you took SINCERELY and not humorastically (contrary to what you said) Robbing Hook defense...on Nuno reference that Robbing Hook just happened to be lucky to have been elected...AT THE LOW POINT OF A WORLD RECESSION IN 2002- Ohhhh and by the way， dont worry...same for Obama ！Hey ！
Joao written by ch.c.， February 09， 2009 and outside of Brazil， but more on the actual banks bad assets. Funny that both the USA and EU are still talking...talking and talking...to decide to create a Bad Bank or not or under what form. My country after only a few weeks of discussions....decided to create a Bad Bank... already in October 2008. Now here is what the European Central Bank said TODAY "The European Central Bank told governments that they should consider combining a so-called bad bank with guarantees of securities if they want to pursue the most cost-effective way of ridding lenders of toxic assets. In draft guidelines to be discussed at a meeting of European finance ministers in Brussels today and tomorrow， the ECB said the number of illiquid assets on banks’ books is likely to mount as the credit crisis shows no sign of ending. While acknowledging that the best strategy varied depending on the bank and country， the ECB noted that Switzerland recently extended aid to UBS AG through a “hybrid scheme” involving elements of a bad bank and insurance. The Swiss National Bank and UBS set up a special fund to buy as much as $60 billion in toxic investments from UBS. Such an approach “limits the upfront cost to the government，” the ECB said in the report. The strategy also found support in a separate draft report by the European Commission， which was prepared with ECB input.To control costs “one could consider combining a bad-bank approach and asset insurance whereby bad assets are transferred to a single entity which benefits in some way from a government guarantee，” the commission said in the report. "This approach combines many of the benefits of the bad- bank approach from the perspective of restoring confidence in the banking system while limiting the budgetary impact，” according to the commission report， which is dated Feb. 6 The ECB said a bad bank would work best in an environment in which there was uncertainty regarding the future quality of bank assets or the impaired securities are concentrated in a few institutions. Insuring the assets may be the best approach if they are hard to value or governments have bloated public finances， it said." Idiots continue talking， while others already acted and ready to act further if necessary. It wont be a long talk...for us...for sure ！ It reminds me when the Brits at the same time， in October 2008， came out with such a good idea that they said Gordon Brown and the UK...SAVED THE WORLD ！ (True Brits statement)- and 4 months later their own banks are obviously in deeper red....because they obviously have not saved the world， not even their own banks...and their own banks are closer to bankruptcy than when they apparently saved the world ！！！！！！ If someone has a problem...just ask to Swiss brains...they will have a viable and satisfactory solution...in just a few days/weeks...！
Ohhh I bet， the EU will also say later....how smart THEY were...with their OWN "original" solution ！
Ch.C written by Jo·o da Silva， February 09， 2009 This was just a reference to the other thread when you took SINCERELY and not humorastically (contrary to what you said) Robbing Hook defense... Incoherence is my middle name. If someone has a problem...just ask to Swiss brains...they will have a viable and satisfactory solution...in just a few days/weeks...！ Yes we have a problem. Lord Augustus is very upset thanks to you. So what are you with your Swiss brain going to do to persuade him to come back to this site with his words of wisdom· BTW， you are causing "Brazilian brain drain" from this blog by chasing off good people like Lord Augustus. Lord Augustus is very upset thanks to you written by ch.c.， February 09， 2009 Just re-read what he CLEARLY stated. DNB is also responsible. Why finger pointing only ME ····· Is your father Robbing Hook...who fingerpoints only foreigners when Brazil has a problem and caress his navel of HIS prowess when EXTERNAL FOREIGN demand is higher · And with a big smile， I can state that Lord Augustus is upset with me because to tease him somewhat， I simply said that in German we write ORDNUNG....not ORDUNG ！ Therefore he has the same reaction as a woman entering Menopause. Never ever disagree with them. Since he is not a woman， he gots the solo-pause reaction， just like YOUNG KIDS do ！ The case is not desperate. HE will return and come back...just like kids do ！ Where else could he be as much acclaimed for his proses ·
And a to HIM， if he reads these lines. BUT....BUT....BUT... written by ...， February 10， 2009 I mean.... Your Butt， Wooden Spoon， and Enema. Yours truly， Costinha CHC - Chronicle Herpes Carrier written by ...， February 10， 2009 I have arranged with Shelly， she will gladly perform the procedure on you！ Just turn over and Butt Up in the Air... Hehehe Your buddy， Costinha Ch.C written by Jo·o da Silva， February 10， 2009 Just re-read what he CLEARLY stated. DNB is also responsible. DnB respected the sentiments of Lord Augustus and did a strategic retreat.BUT....BUT......， you kept on correcting a simple spelling error Lord Augustus committed in German which is not his native language. The least you could have done was to accept his explanations and graciously indicated a good add-on German dictionary to his browser. You forgot that DUNG is a DUNG and probably Augustus deliberately spelled it "ORDUNG" to say that the "Order" is in a pile of "Dung". Therefore he has the same reaction as a woman entering Menopause. Never ever disagree with them. Since he is not a woman， he gots the solo-pause reaction， just like YOUNG KIDS do ！ The case is not desperate. HE will return and come back...just like kids do ！ Shocking statements from you Herr.Ch.c. You just proved that you are not only a male chauvinistic pig， but also cruel to crian·as (Kids)，after all the tireless defense Dnb and Lord Augustus put forth to defend your honor. .Of course， you wouldn't know， because you were savoring the fleshpots of CA & FL. BTW， there are some folks in www. that are questioning your "authority". Obviously you left your flanks open. Don′t count on Augustus，Dnb and me to save you. You are on your own left to the proverbial wolves. Ah， before I forget： Is your father Robbing Hook...who fingerpoints only foreigners when Brazil has a problem and caress his navel of HIS prowess when EXTERNAL FOREIGN demand is higher · He is the "father of the poor" and hence automatically becomes mine！ Naturally Vargas becomes our "Grandpa". Haben sie verstanden · Costinha written by ch.c..， February 11， 2009 is back...after having been fed....sex for food....in a Brazilian jail for a few weeks. No doubt she enjoyed her stay ！ Joao Insults never touched me...when they come from idiots， junkies and recently even from goats ！ I just keep ； Ohhhhh and Dnbaiacu is back...contrary to what you pretend. Welcome back to him. He has certainly much more common sense that most forum members here ！ Ohhhh and as to your statement of Robbing Hook being the father of the poors. Welllll...that is exactly what he wants you to swallow. But in fact he is the protector and guardian of the minority elite. He is very good at talking to the poors and working for the minority elite. I just remind you that it is YOU who added the middle name INCOHERENCE...in your own name. |
|
|
