Brazilian Politics: Theories, Methods and Cases

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

The political economy of Brazil
The levels of inequality in Brazil
The case of the Bolsonaro presidency
Authoritarian regimes
The multiparty system of governance
Corruption in Brazil
Inequalities based on race, gender, and class
Works Cited

The political economy of Brazil

According to popular political scholars of the 19^th century such as Karl Marx and Adam Smith, the political events of a country affect its economic performance. Consequently, a country could be wealthy in terms of natural resources but perform poorly due to bad governance. However, modern governments have various tools to measure health and stabilize their countries economies. Tools such as the gross domestic product (GDP) and the gross national income (GNI) measure the wealth of the country and its people, usually every year (Dickovick and Eastwood 81). These indicators help the government in regulating inequality, the cost of living and the level of unemployment in the country. In most democracies, such as Brazil, the government acts to control the political economy to protect the vulnerable population and to provide opportunities to its citizens. Brazil is one of the fastest-rising economies whose economic policies are shifting from being state-led to market-based ones.

One of the ways that the government relinquishes economic power to the private sector is privatization. The pro-market perspective drives the government to auction some companies in major sectors of the economy. This school of thought holds that only market players (the private sector) can fully understand complex market forces. For instance, in a bid to stabilize the economy after the slump associated with the Covid 19 pandemic, the Brazilian government offered a portfolio of 115 public assets for privatization through a public auction. Some of the assets to be relinquished to the private sector players include 16 ports, 24 airports, 6 parks and forest reserves, 6 roads, mining rights and oil reservoirs, among others. These concessions are expected to generate over $70 billion for the government in 2021 (McCoy and Traiano).

This privatization drive is necessary for the Brazilian government to advance industrial production in the republic and to stimulate investment. This move is healthy for the countrys economy because it liberates these organizations from corrupt political actors whose decisions will stall the growth of the economy, especially in the Covid era. The pandemic has preceded the loss of many jobs due to lockdowns and the government aims to reverse this trend by encouraging the expansion of the companies through privatization. This privatization drive supplements other decisions such as the revisions of fiscal and monetary policies in place in the country to shield the countrys populations from the ravages of the recent global economic downtown. On the other hand, the funds raised by the government can be used to improve the human development index if the revenue is allocated to the overwhelmed healthcare system. If more people get treatment for respiratory disease, then the government would have bolstered the human capital and the economy.

The levels of inequality in Brazil

There are several indicators of a countrys development levels. Some of the most pertinent ones include economic growth, social and cultural relations, among others. Whereas it is easier to measure the rate of economic growth in a country using tools such as the nations GDP and GNI, it is much more difficult to measure development in terms of cultural and social growth (Dickovick and Eastwood 109). The Human Development Index (HDI) combines aspects such as the level of education of a countrys citizens, poverty levels, economic inequality. Moreover, it includes cultural, environmental sustainability, gender, and racial relations that determine the level of satisfaction of the general populace.

Fahad Mustafa and Deepti Kakkars documentary Powerless is a movie that illuminates the class struggles of the people of Kanpur, India. The city is underdeveloped and there is a wide berth between the privileges enjoyed by the economic elite and the underprivileged. In the densely populated industrial city, only the rich have access to a steady supply of electrical power. The levels of public satisfaction and the constant civil protests indicate a malfunctioning economy where people living below the poverty line are underserved (Mustafa and Kakkar). It takes the intervention of Loha Singh to illegally connect the poor to the power grid. The corrupt electricity company personnel prove that the local government agrees with state-led economy proponents. The documentary illuminates how the local government limits the supply of power to the poor population in order to collect high power bills from the privileged few. The Marxist structure in the town maintains the status quo in the town despite the efforts of Ritu Maheshwari and Loha Singh.

The outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic has provided economists with one more indicator with which to measure the levels of inequality in Brazil. Just like in the documentary Powerless, the poor, illiterate people account for more than ¾ of all Covid deaths in the country. They are powerless against the disease because most of them lack health insurance and the level of education that would help them contain its spread. The life expectancy of the poor is lower than that of the rich by a decade, because of their inability to deal with infectious diseases. The rich can afford excellent medical cover and care while the poor have to line up for hours on end to get the attention of the medics. Such a dysfunctional medical system shows that Brazil is losing its reputation as a rapidly burgeoning economy due to the inequalities.

The case of the Bolsonaro presidency

Democracy is a highly complicated idea since its definition and depth changes over time. However, it is clear that some of the basic tenets of governance such as elections, social welfare, civic participation and devolution of powers have to be upheld for a government to be considered democratic. In democracies, the elections to elect the countrys leaders are regular, multiparty, free and fair (Touchton 68). Additionally, the citizens enjoy liberties such as free speech, access to information and unionization. On the other hand, democratization is the process by which a country transitions from authoritarianism to democracy. Some of the causes of democratization include cultural theories, the international system, modernization theories, and the actions of institutions. In a nutshell, functional democracies uphold the will of the populace.

The case of the Bolsonaro presidency in Brazil is a prime example of a dysfunctional democracy, despite regular elections. Last year, the country elected the former soldier to counter the nations perennial struggles with corruption, crime and impunity. However, the campaign pledges of the president have gone largely unfulfilled. The handling of the Coronavirus pandemic has brought an even sharper focus on the presidency. Considering that the country democratized in 1985, it is a relatively young democracy that is being sabotaged by a former military man. The will of the people matters little to the executive and many high-profile government officials have either resigned or have been sacked for voicing the concerns of millions of Brazilians.

The sacking of the federal chief of police earlier this year sparked outrage, which culminated in the resignation of the countrys justice minister Sergio Moro. The minister had implicated the president of the wrongful dismissal of Maurício Valeixo, as well as overstepping his mandate because he is constitutionally incapable of sacking the police chief. Further, the president overruled the will of the people when he sacked the countrys health minister in April 2020 when he advocated for social distancing to contain infectious respiratory disease. All these events prove that Brazils democracy is still a work in progress and that it is being undermined by the president himself.

Since his takeover, the president has overseen the irresponsible development of Amazon land. The deforestation and development of the Amazon have affected the livelihoods and the survival of aboriginal populations who depend on the forest. The democratization process is stalling because the president has placed his personal ambitions of re-election in 2022 ahead of civic participation in the democratic process (Chibba). Many political analysts in the country are worried that the country could be reverting to authoritarianism if the trend is not reversed. The president has effectively made politics and the economy dichotomous. Corruption and impunity have seen the country lose an annual revenue of more than $38 billion because gangs are taking over some government functions in some cities.

Authoritarian regimes

Authoritarian regimes are those whose leaders overrule the will of the people. Oftentimes, these leaders will violate human rights to protect their own interests. However, there is a form of governance that disguises its autocratic nature with some tenets of democracy. The leaders of such governments will violate rules and use political authority to protect their dynasties. Despite allowing regular multiparty elections, the leaders rig them and retain their seats. The elections are competitive only at face value since many of the opposition leaders are harassed, jailed and in some instances exiled or killed. In many modern competitive autocracies, the elite few control much of the nations wealth (Levitsky and Way 53). In countries where such regimes form the government, the press does not have enough freedom to report the governments misdeeds explicitly. In some instances, such as in persistence authoritarianism, one autocratic leader paves the way to another through an electoral process.

In many cases, competitive authoritarianism arises from the need for elected leaders to protect their wealth and to guarantee preferential treatment by the law throughout their lives. However, some other causes of such regimes include rising levels of poverty and inequality in growing economies. Furthermore, if democracy fails, such as when the judiciary and other government institutions are infiltrated by members of the ruling elite, then the governance will be autocratic despite being competitive. For instance, in Brazil, the opposition is so weakened that the media has no option but to assume its role. In recent times, there have been high-profile cases of political violence and intimidation. Popular leaders such as the openly gay Jean Wyllys and former gubernatorial contestant Marcia Tiburi were forced to flee the country due to death threats.

Some scholars have argued that it is impossible to have a democratic government when the countrys wealth is under the control of a few individuals. In Brazil, the elite few control most of the wealth and thus will serve their own interests at the expense of the poor people. President Bolsonaro has surrounded himself with more than 130 military officials in his government (Pahnke). The country, therefore, qualifies as a competitive authoritarian nation because the military has made a comeback through a clever electoral process. The ruling party is nonchalant about how other people view them and their partially autocratic rule. The current government is not outright authoritarian. Rather, major players in the executive, the judiciary, the evangelical leaders and agribusiness leaders have ganged up to harass their opponents and stifle democracy. As such Brazilian activists have the herculean task of breaking the semi-authoritarian regime through collective action.

The multiparty system of governance

Government executives are the officials elected to execute and implement policies. In most democracies, the executive is headed by the president, who is the head of state and a prime minister, who is the head of government. In the presidential system, the head of government is elected directly by the voters while the president in a parliamentary system is elected by members of the legislature (Dickovick and Eastwood 243). The president often has formal powers, which he uses to execute his/her constitutional authority or partisan powers which he uses to influence the votes of other members of his party. Additionally, the head of state can possess the informal powers which enable him or her to set the agenda for the general population due to charisma. Many scholars argue that the parliamentary system of governance is more effective and that the presidential system allows for some form of autocracy.

Many democracies have multiparty systems where several parties are allowed to take part in national and presidential elections. However, in most industrialized and middle-income countries there are two parties that dominate the legislature and the executive. The party system is complemented by other institutions and organizations such as civil societies which champion the rights of the citizens. In a perfect democracy, all these stakeholders in the government will articulate their interests and thereafter aggregate them to make collective decisions. Such decisions are often inclusive and the benefits of the policies made after widespread consultation and the electoral process are typically healthy for any democracy. However, in an autocracy, or single-party state, the opposition is often crushed by outlawing other parties. On the other hand, there are states where multiple parties exist but only the ruling party is powerful enough to produce the head of state. The different party systems are created to suit different systems of governance.

Brazil, a middle-income nation, uses the multiparty system of governance. Voting in the country is not just a right for the countrys citizens, it is a legal obligation for adults. However, the government system is presidential and thus the executive wields more power because they obtain it directly from the electorate. That explains why the country, unlike parliamentary systems such as Britain regularly has periods of military rule. Bolsonaro, the countrys current president used populism ideologies to ascend to power. He convinced the electorate that he would combat corruption and crime but has gone against his word and is using his powers as the president of the nation to advance his own agenda. Instead of combating the Coronavirus as many would expect, he openly defies safety guidelines and reopened the economy prematurely to cater to his business and political agenda.

As a result of a series of poor decision-making processes and a weakened opposition, the president has almost singlehandedly spearheaded the transition of Brazil from a growing democracy into a country under subtle military rule. The president has appointed senior members of the executive and judiciary from the military (Costa). Moreover, by destroying the PT, the other major political party in the country, he is laying the groundwork for Brazil to become a single-party state. By the time he leaves office, he may have weakened the opposition so much that none of the presidential hopefuls from the other parties will successfully challenge him for the presidency in 2022.

Corruption in Brazil

The influence of political power on corruption remains a contentious issue in academic discourse. While reformers claim that policies such as public subsidies reduce corruption, observes note that such measures do not affect it. Hummel et al. argue that reforms regulating political finance reduce corruption by limiting the significance of private money in politics (2). Most governments control the availability and use of money in politics by offering subsidies to political parties. It has been shown that such policies promote good governance and enhance representative democracy. However, corruption has become a significant issue in subsidies involving the most advanced political finance systems. Despite laws being enacted to control money in politics, officials find ways to circumvent these regulations. Considerable literature posits that political finance plays a significant role in fueling corruption, even in the most efficient democracies. This results from poor implementation of political finance subsidies that mask endemic corruption in most countries. However, other studies have pointed out that political subsidies do not have a marked impact on corruption. Therefore, the current study sought to determine whether this proposition is correct, relying on interviews from officials involved in Paraguays political finance.

The authors note that the relationship between the quality of governance and the political subsidies in a given democracy remains untested. The unavailability of substantial data to test this correlation hampers the implementation of a comprehensive system to analyze this proposition. More so, the influence of political finance in the quality of governance has not been recognized and is mostly undermined. However, political reforms affecting finance might have an essential impact on mitigating corruption by controlling the use of private money in politics. Besides, policies that establish sanctions on political corruption enhance reducing the practice in most democracies. The study focused on the 1996 reforms in Paraguay affecting political finance to determine their effectiveness in reducing the overall systemic corruption. The researchers used a dataset that measures the subsidies offered to political parties during campaigns to evaluate corruption in Paraguay. The study found that finance subsidies are integral in reducing political corruption in various government offices.

Reformers have remained skeptical about the undue influence of private money in corruption scandals within political parties. The central argument holds that subsidies can insulate parties while promoting competition and representation. Countries such as Costa Rica have developed post-election subsidies that regulate controversial practices, enhance transparency and accountability. Other democracies such as Mexico and Argentina borrowed ideas of implementing political finance reforms from pioneers such as Spain which had already established effective subsidies. In Brazil, many cases of political scandals have been reported in the recent past, and those implicated continue to enjoy successful political careers. For instance, Paulo Maluf has received numerous allegations of money laundering and corruption of public funds. Despite these issues, Maluf was elected as the federal deputy and continued to experience protection from the court (Jucá et al. 4). The case of Brazil shows that although corruption related to campaign finance affects the reputation of lawmakers, most incumbents continue to serve in the government. Many federal deputies in Brazil have been involved in numerous corruption scandals, which makes corruption a critical issue in the countrys politics.

Brazil requires a careful evaluation to determine the underlying factors that support systemic corruption in campaign finance. Although Hummel et al. (3) have shown that political subsidies reduce corruption, the same cannot be said for Brazil. Mostly, this can be attributed to the fact that the country has not established a transparent democracy.

Inequalities based on race, gender, and class

Political empowerment in American and Latin American countries has seen people from socially disadvantaged groups being elected to positions of power. However, this does not imply that inequalities based on race, gender, and class do not exist. Economic inequality remains a potent issue that threatens good governance and the implementation of democratic policies. The elite few continue to dominate in political positions of influence. Gender disparity shows that women are underrepresented in political positions that influence reforms. In addition, race and ethnicity have a significant impact on political representation, especially with the current social diversity in many countries. Racial and ethnic inequalities are reflected in laws such as the Jim Crow laws in the US (Dickovick and Eastwood 336). Similarly, gender has been socially constructed to restrict certain groups that are discriminated against by the dominant society. The concepts of race and gender remain important issues that define modern political representation in culturally diverse countries. These ideologies have been used to create social distinctions of particular groups marked by the idea of gender and race. The stratification observed in society results inon people in different groups competing while excluding others to uphold their social status.

Racial inequalities are apparent in many countries, including the United States, which has been described as the melting pot of racism. Particularly, immigrants in the 19^th century faced significant racial discrimination. Today, African Americans continue to experience systemic and institutional racism in the country. Despite these inequalities, various advances have been made to reduce segregation and discrimination based on race and ethnicity (Dickovick and Eastwood 336). In the US, race plays an essential role in determining the political advantages of minority groups. The election of Barrack Obama as the president marked a significant milestone in the fight against racial prejudice. However, racial concerns remain imminent among African Americans and other minority groups in the country. The economic empowerment of these groups can help alleviate the low social status often associated with the black community.

Gender is another important issue that affects the global culture since inequalities are observed in almost every country. In Brazil, the oppression of women has been persistent, although feminists have made major strides in liberating women. Gender discrimination in political fronts is evident as women occupy fewer positions both elected and appointed. Although laws have been developed to empower women and other minority groups, the actual efforts should see these individuals occupying positions in political offices (Dickovick and Eastwood 343). The institutional design can be developed in a way that specific seats are reserved for women in political offices. Lastly, political parties can address gender issues by encouraging female candidates to participate in elections.

I have learned many insights into the issues affecting the global economy in relation to inequalities that are observed in most countries. While race and gender are important features, economic inequalities between the wealthy and the poor affect distribution of democracy. The topics of gender and race are major concerns that should not be affecting the current society. In that case, proactive approaches need to be adopted to ensure that people receive equal political and economic representation despite their gender or ethnicity. Further, global economic inequalities should be addressed to bridge the gap between the extremes of wealth and poverty. In the documentary Powerless, it is clear that the less disadvantaged people in society endure extreme poverty that lowers their quality of life. I believe that political institutions have the ability to change these conditions and ensure that resources are equally distributed.

Works Cited

Chibba, Michael. Political Economy and Democracy in Brazil Under Bolsonaro. OpenDemocracy, 2020.

Costa, Petra. Brazil has become a Cautionary Tale for the Worlds Democracies. The Guardian, 2019.

Dickovick, James Tyler, and Jonathan Eastwood. Comparative Politics: Integrating Theories, Methods, and Cases. Oxford University Press, 2019.

Hummel, Calla, John Gerring, and Thomas Burt. Do Political Finance Reforms Reduce Corruption? British Journal of Political Science, 2019, pp. 1-21.

Jucá, Ivan, Marcus André Melo, and Lucio Rennó. The Political Cost of Corruption: Scandals, Campaign Finance, and Reelection in the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies. Journal of Politics in Latin America, vol. 8 no. 2, 2016, pp. 3-36.

Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan A. Way. Elections without Democracy: The Rise Of Competitive Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy vol. 13, no. 2, 2002, pp. 51-65.

McCoy, Terrence, and Heloísa Traiano. One Disease. Two Brazils. The Washington Post, 2020.

Mustafa, Fahad, and Deepti Kakkar. Powerless (Katiyabaaz). Globalistan Films ITVS, 2013.

Pahnke, Anthony R. The Brazilian Crisis and the New Authoritarianism. Monthly Review, 2020, Web.

Touchton, Michael, Natasha Borges Sugiyama, and Brian Wampler. Democracy at Work: Moving Beyond Elections to Improve Well-Being. American Political Science Review, vol. 111, no. 1, 2017, pp. 68-82.

Click Here To Order Now!