Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T06:45:56.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Brazilian Political System: Trends and Perspectives*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2014

Celso Lafer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

IN 1964 THE BRAZILIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM UNDERWENT A basic change. The populist republic (1946–64), which had paved the way for both a formal and an informal extension of political and economic franchises, after the success of Kubitschek's administration (1956–61) and Quadros's resignation (1961), collapsed as a result of decisional paralysis. The economic challen e of accumulation and the political challenge of social justice led, in the early 1960s during the Goulart administration, both to a fragmentation of power and to radicalization. The more demands multiplied, the more the government hesitated, feeding the anxiety of different political grou s in society. The result was a growing distrust of the politicafsystem. Distrust in turn not only prevented a coalition in support of a consistent governmental programme but also brought about an intensification of conflictual demands. This self-sustaining mechanism of decisional paralysis was interrupted by the emergence of what has been called by Juan Linz and Guuermo O'Donnell ‘a bureaucratic-authoritarian regime’.

Type
Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 19 , Issue 2 , 01 April 1984 , pp. 178 - 187
Copyright
Copyright © Government and Opposition Ltd 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf. O’Donnell, Guillermo, Linz, Juan et al., O Estado Autoritário e Movimentos Populares, Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra, 1980 Google Scholar. For recent developments in research cf, Wanderley Guilherme Dos Santos, ‘Autoritarismo e Após: Convergěncias e Divergěncias entre Brasil e Chile’ and Garretón, Manuel Antonio, ‘Em Torno da Discussäo sobre os Novos Regimes Autoritários na América Latina’, both in Dados, vol. 25, No. 2, 1982, pp. 151–63, and 165–87Google Scholar.

2 Cf. Bobbio, Norberto, La Teoria delle Forme di Governo nella Storia del Pensiero Politico, Turin, Giappichelli, 1976 Google Scholar; ‘La Resistenza all’Oppresione, Oggi’, Studi Sassaresi ‐ III ‐ Autonomia e Diritto di Resistenza, Academic Year 1970‐1971, pp. 15–31.

3 Cf. Bobbio, Norberto, La Ideologia e il Potere in Crisi, Florence, Mounier, 1981, pp. 3–21 Google Scholar.

4 Cf. Arendt, Hannah, The Origins of Totalitarianism (new edition with added prefaces), New York, Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich, 1973 Google Scholar, Part III ‐Chaps. 11 and 12.

5 On this issue, for theoretical considerations cf. Deutsch, Karl W., ‘On the Learning Capacity of Large Political Systems’, Chap. 6 of Information for Action: From Knowledge to Wisdom, New York, Academic Press, Inc., 1975, pp. 61–83 Google Scholar.

6 Cf. Hirschman, Albert O., Exit, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations and States, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1970 Google Scholar; Essays in Trespassing ‐ Economics to Politics and Beyond, Cambridge, Mass, Cambridge University Press, 1981, pp. 211–65.

7 Cf. Deutsch, Karl W., The Nerves of Government, N. York, Free Press, 1966 Google Scholar, Chap. 13.

8 Arendt, Hannah in Hannah Arendt: The Recovery of the Public World, edited by Hill, Melvyn A., N. York, St Martin’s Press, 1979. p. 317 Google Scholar.