Populism in Brazil
An exceptional case, or a more Global issue?
By Alex Chace
Date: 24 April 2023
Police on site to remove protesters from the Three Powers Plaza in Brasilia.
Courtesy of Marcelo Camargo (2023).
On January 8th, 2023, the so-called “Bolsonaristas” stormed three governmental buildings in Brasilia, demanding the reinstation of Jair Bolsonaro, who had lost the most recent Brazilian election in October 2022 to Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (commonly known as Lula), into presidency. Congressional buildings were vandalised, windows were smashed, and works of art were stolen or broken. As a result, at the time of writing, more than 1,000 people have been arrested in relation to the attack (Madani, 2023).
How did such an event come to be? And how did Bolsonaro get into power in the first place?
Prior to Bolsonaro being elected in 2019, Brazil was in a state of turmoil; the country had recently experienced its biggest corruption scandal known as “Operation Carwash”, a money laundering scheme involving the company Petrobras, which reportedly funnelled money directly to politicians (Kirby, 2018). At this point, Bolsonaro had been serving as a congressman from 1991 (until 2018) after a 15-year career in the military. He was very vocal in his distaste towards the Brazilian Worker’s Party, which was facing the bulk of these conviction charges. He was also one of the key votes for then-president Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment in 2017.
As a result, Bolsonaro gained the ability to position himself as an outsider to this systematic corruption. Lula was still polling further ahead than any other presidential candidate despite being a member of the Brazilian Worker’s Party whilst in prison on a corruption charge in relation to Operation Carwash until a supreme court ruling in 2019 (Phillips, 2019). However, due to this conviction, Lula was barred from running in this election in 2017. Once Bolsonaro’s main competition, Lula, was out of the presidential race, he was able to triumph against the increasingly unpopular Brazilian Worker’s Party. And so, like Trump, Bolsonaro was able to gain popularity by distancing himself from a system that the population deemed to be corrupt.
Bolsonaro has persistently been vocal in his support of the implementation of some military tactics used by the regime that existed during Brazil’s dictatorship between 1964 and 1985. This pro-military stance made his younger supporters, without living memory of the dictatorship, place Bolsonaro on a pedestal of being the icon of law and order. This came at a time in which crime in Brazil was 6 times as high as in the USA (Kirby, 2018). Some of his voters would have a mentality not of support, but akin to ‘I don’t like him but he’s the only one who can get the job done’. This mentality has also been apparent in the UK and the USA.
Bolsonaro (central in frame) attending a conference.
Courtesy of Força Aérea Brasileira (2022).
Populism as an Ideology
Now onto ideology. Many political leaders in recent times have been accused of engaging in populism, such as Trump, Boris Johnson, and Vladimir Putin. Whilst coming to a common definition of populism is a contested issue in academia, it can usually be described as the act of a prominent figure or political leader siding against “the establishment” and siding with “the people”(Deiwiks, 2009).
Populism can exist at both ends of the political spectrum, but the difference lies in how both the establishment and the people are defined (Deiwiks, 2009). In left-wing populism, the “people” may be defined as the working class and the establishment as the upper class. On the other hand, right-wing populism also sides with the people, but also with ideologies such as nationalism and is often against the establishment of liberal politics and globalism. As will be further discussed, Bolsonaro demonstrates many tendencies that lean towards right-wing populism.
The attacks on Brasilia by Bolsonaristas and on Washington D.C. in 2021 by Trump supporters have obvious parallels. Many news outlets have made clear comparisons, for example: ‘Time’ magazine published an article titled: “Brazil Attack Reveals Trump’s Insurrection Strategy Is Now a Blueprint”, and ‘USAToday’ wrote: “Why were anti-government riots in Brazil so similar to the Jan. 6 insurrection?”. The extremism of both Trump and Bolsonaro have also been noted for their similarities, especially amongst their followers.
For example: approximately three out of four Brazilian Bolsonaro supporters only partially trusted or had no trust in the polls that took place in the time prior to the election. Meanwhile, in the USA the week after Trump had lost, around 70% of republicans said that they did not believe that the 2020 election was fair (Doménech, 2023). This ability to influence the common mindsets on the level of trustworthiness of the media and governmental institutions is a clear and dangerous example of right-wing populism.
Bolsonaro meeting with then-US President Donald Trump in the White House.
Courtesy of Isac Nóbrega (2019).
Difference between the rise of populism in the US and Brazil
However, between the two episodes, there are some key differences. Firstly, in Washington D.C., only one building (the Capitol) was stormed, whereas in Brazil the three largest democratic institutions were attacked: the Supreme Federal Court, the National Congress Building, and the Planalto Presidential Powers. Additionally, this was all done whilst Lula was officially president, whereas Trump was just technically still in power during the Washington D.C. attack. This would suggest a higher degree of distrust in the political powers of Brazil than what was witnessed in the USA.
Additionally, unlike the USA, it was harder to know where the loyalties of the security forces were in Brazil. The planning of the insurrection had been very public and was ongoing for several days; this attracted heavy criticism against the Brazilian authorities for how ill-equipped they were to handle the situation. Before the turn of the new year, a group of Bolsonaro supporters had attempted to storm the Federal Police Headquarters in Brasília whilst setting fire to cars and buses. Another radical supporter who was arrested in December had confessed to having allegedly plotted to bomb an airport in the hope to inspire a military coup.
Even worse, some evidence has suggested that a large proportion of the Military Police of the Federal District (in which Brasilia is located), as well as the armed forces generally, were overall in support of the attack (Garcia, 2023). This demonstrates that the concerning impact of Bolsonaro’s leadership is the public’s lack of faith in such public safety services. As a result, his actions have grave implications for the future of Brazil’s level of security globally and especially internally. The recently elected president, Lula, has also criticised the law enforcement bodies; Phillips and Downie (2023, p.g 1.) reported that Lula stated they had engaged in “incompetence, bad faith or malice”. Public relations with the police and security forces were already far from perfect. Even pre-Bolsonaro studies found that approximately 63% of Brazilians were unsatisfied with police performance (Fox, 2017).
The Supreme Court of Brazil will be investigating the former president over allegations regarding his involvement in the attack. This inquiry follows a video posted on his public account two days after the events suggesting that the 2022 Brazilian elections were fraudulent, which has resulted in officials believing that he is in fact culpable for the attack (Alberti and Reverdosa, 2023).
Supreme Court of Brazil.
Courtesy of Ricαrdo (2009).
Epilogue
Fascism obviously is not limited to The Americas. During the 20th century, we saw the rise of fascism and authoritarianism in Europe with Franco, Mussolini, and Hitler.. Following current trends, what can be learned from the events of Bolsonaro’s presidency and others similar? How can populism and the extreme right be prevented from prevailing in other countries?
Paxton (1998, p.g. 11) writes that the five stages of fascism are as follows: i) the initial creation of fascist movements; ii) their rooting as parties in a political system; iii) the acquisition of power; iv) the exercise of power; and v) radicalisation or entropy. In these initial stages, the fascist will pursue a reactionary fight against the perceived failings of a current democracy. From this, the public must agree that their current system is in fact, not functional; this can be for a multitude of reasons: economic, social, or material.
“Nationalism gives the two great enemies behind the woes of people: Europe, and immigrants. The external enemy, the internal enemy. Both combined ensure that no one is paying attention at inequality or working and living conditions.” (EESC, 2018, p.g.1).
To conclude, to prevent the development of fascism, nationalism and authoritarian populism, it is necessary to address the underlying social issues that may radicalise a population into being vulnerable to such ideologies.
Crowd supporting then-President Bolsonaro during the 2021 Verde e Amarelo Movement.
Courtesy of Palácio do Planalto (2021).
Copyright © 2022 Sparklight Media
Next Article