1.
THE CURRENT POLITICAL DEADLOCK IN BRAZIL
Fernando Alcoforado *
Today, Brazil is a country divided between PT (Worker Party) and anti PT which
resulted in the last presidential elections. Based on the results of the presidential
elections in its second round, it appears that the supporters of PT represent 40% (Dilma
Rousseff voters). The difference (60%) is the placement of the PT opponents who do
not accept the policy pursued by that party and its leaders in the conduction of the
nation's destiny. The existence of a divided and radicalized country that registers today
becomes difficult to Dilma Rousseff to perform her task to rule Brazil.
The permanence of the PT in power with the victory of Dilma Rousseff in the second
round of elections constitutes an institutional political instability factor because without
the support of the vast majority of the nation she has lost her condition to govern Brazil.
Dilma Rousseff became a copy of Nicolas Maduro, president of Venezuela, facing
serious problems of governance in their deeply divided country. The governance of a
country by a ruler's legitimacy depends not only of the victory in the presidential
elections, but fundamentally in the active support of the vast majority of the nation.
If Aécio Neves, candidate of PSDB (Party of Brazilian Social Democracy), as opposed
to PT, was elected president of the Republic would not have like Rousseff the political
capacity to rally the nation around a common project of national development. Aécio
Neves face the opposition of PT and its allies in the same way that Dilma Rousseff is
facing opposition from large sectors of the population who admit even the return of
military rule in the country. It is undisputed that the serious problems now faced by
Brazil in economic and political areas are demanding a ruler who has the ability to unite
the nation around a common project of national development. Unfortunately, there is
not anyone in Brazil who meets this capacity.
The nation is waiting for a leader who has the stature of a statesman as was Getúlio
Vargas who promoted the construction of modern Brazil with the industrialization
process after the global economic crisis of 1929 and the Revolution of 1930. The
serious crisis currently experienced by Brazil is demanding a true statesman at the helm
of the nation that restructures the national life on a new basis in the economic, political
and social arenas. It is worth noting that governance would be ensured only in Brazil if
their rulers would ensure the continuity of the process of capitalist accumulation for the
benefit of the bourgeoisie and if there were increasing income redistribution in favor of
the subaltern classes (petty bourgeoisie, urban and rural proletariat and
lumpenproletariat).
The Dilma Rousseff government may face immense difficulties to rule Brazil because it
would has only support of the lumpenproletariat, also called the "common people",
basis of social support from the governments of PT, and the urban and rural proletariat
and count on the opposition of bourgeoisie and large sectors of the petty bourgeoisie
unless the Dilma Rousseff government do them ample concessions. Still, Dilma
Rousseff would govern a divided country. If Aécio Neves came to power also face with
immense difficulties to rule Brazil because it would have only support of part of the
bourgeoisie and the petty bourgeoisie in addition to the opposition of the urban and
rural proletariat and the lumpenproletariat also governing a divided country.
1

2.
It should be noted that in the current stage of development of capitalism in Brazil,
governance is only ensured if its rulers ensure the continuity of the process of capitalist
accumulation for the benefit of the bourgeoisie and if increasing income redistribution
in favor of the subaltern classes (petty bourgeoisie, and urban and rural proletariat and
lumpenproletariat). Therefore, in order to govern, every government must ensure the
gains of the bourgeois and seek to improve the material welfare of the population. And
to improve it, the government needs to promote economic development to generate
employment and income distribution.
The economic stagnation that tends to worsen in Brazil, in addition to increasing
unemployment and negatively affect income distribution, can reduce state revenues and
demand cuts in the government budget. If economic stagnation and rising inflation are
not reversed, the Rousseff government tend to lose the support of public opinion that
would associate the loss of budgetary resources required for the support of the
population, a parliamentary coalition of government and to preserve support or
acquiescence of groups, businesses and social organizations that depend on the
provision of state resources.
Most likely, any domestic and foreign investor would invest in Brazil with a stagnant
economy as it is right now with the deeply divided country. The stagnation of the
Brazilian economy would cause also falling government revenues at all levels so that
there is no public funds for investment in enough quantity to invest in economic and
social infrastructure as well as to maintain social programs of income transfer as the
"Bolsa Familia".
The situation currently experienced in Brazil puts the nation before three future political
scenarios: 1) it would be the success of the overall achievement of the national State
(Executive, Judiciary and Legislature) by PT party repeating the dictatorship exercised
by Chavez in Venezuela and the PRI, that controlled the political life of Mexico for 71
years, through the control of the state apparatus and a system based on corruption and
crushing of forces of the bourgeoisie and part of petty bourgeoisie; 2) the government
Dilma Rousseff and PT would ensure the governability winning a parliamentary
majority in Congress co-opting allied parties and making broad concessions to financial
capital and the petty bourgeoisie for their support which would be added to the urban
and rural proletariat and the lumpenproletariat; and, 3) worsening of the current
economic crisis would lead to dissatisfaction of broad sectors of the bourgeoisie,
especially of financial capital, and much of the petty bourgeoisie and the urban and rural
proletariat which would result in institutional political instability that could create a
Hobbesian situation characterized by economic and social chaos and even civil war,
which could only be averted by strong central government, ie, with the deployment of a
dictatorial system.
The confrontation between PT and anti PT is on the agenda because the former are
aimed at making the scenario 1 to be viable the conquest of the state by PT while the
latter aim to avoid that scenario fighting for the "impeachment" of Rousseff by
condoning corruption that she would practiced ahead of government and to believe that
there was fraud in electronic voting in the last election. The PT's victory in the
presidential elections of October 26 next last led to the maintenance of the Executive
Power. PT is already hegemonic in the Judiciary Power. Possession of the Executive
and the Judiciary, the Legislature would be entirely at the mercy of PT. The conquest of
the state by PT in Brazil would materialize in practice.
2

3.
The second scenario would only occur if the federal government could win the support
of finance capital, and succeeded in reversing the current economic crisis characterized
by the downward trend in economic growth, rising inflation, rising unemployment and
the inability of the Brazilian government, states and municipalities to meet the demands
of Brazilian society. The third scenario, which is claimed by sectors of the far right that
advocate the return of military rule in Brazil, will inevitably occur if scenarios 1 and 2
do not materialize.
* Fernando Alcoforado , member of the Bahia Academy of Education, engineer and doctor of Territorial
Planning and Regional Development from the University of Barcelona, a university professor and
consultant in strategic planning, business planning, regional planning and planning of energy systems, is
the author of Globalização (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1997), De Collor a FHC- O Brasil e a Nova
(Des)ordem Mundial (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1998), Um Projeto para o Brasil (Editora Nobel, São
Paulo, 2000), Os condicionantes do desenvolvimento do Estado da Bahia (Tese de doutorado.
Universidade de Barcelona, http://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/1944, 2003), Globalização e
Desenvolvimento (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2006), Bahia- Desenvolvimento do Século XVI ao Século XX
e Objetivos Estratégicos na Era Contemporânea (EGBA, Salvador, 2008), The Necessary Conditions of
the Economic and Social Development-The Case of the State of Bahia (VDM Verlag Dr. Muller
Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2010), Aquecimento Global e Catástrofe
Planetária (P&A Gráfica e Editora, Salvador, 2010), Amazônia Sustentável- Para o progresso do Brasil e
combate ao aquecimento global (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, 2011)
and Os Fatores Condicionantes do Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2012),
among others.
3