Opening through Elections: Will the Brazilian Case Become a Paradigm?

Abstract

SINCE 1974, A PROCESS OF POLITICAL ‘OPENING’ HAS BEEN taking place in Brazil. But it was only after 1978, when the amnesty law was passed and exiles be an to return, that a majority of observers and academic analysts convinced them-selves that that process was real. The Brazilian regime can still be described as military-based and authoritarian, but now the so-called abertura has become meaningful enough to direct our attention to a different set of questions: why did such changes take place, contrary to most predictions, journalistic as well as academic, of the late 1960s and early 1970s? Why have elections pla ed such a decisive role in them, again contrary to most predictions? Are the fruits picked in this example of redemocratization really ripe to be enjoyed? Can the other countries subject to military-authoritarian rule in the Southern Cone equally aspire to them – that is , to orderly but yet significant steps toward an eventual demise of their authoritarian systems?

The Brazilian Press and the Politics of Abertura

“…They concentrate instead on the military, the opposition, relations between political structures and economic development, and changes within political institutions, particularly electoral mechanisms and political parties (Cruz and Martins, 1983; Skidmore, 1983;Cardoso, 1983;Lamounier, 1983). The transition from authoritarianism in Brazil has also been fruitfully compared to regime changes elsewhere, most notably to those in southern Europe (Linz, 1983).…”

“…Since then, once-banned topics have been covered in depth (Dassin, 1982: 149-186). Indeed, a more autonomous press and a return to more competitive elections were cornerstones in the abertura launched in the mid 1970s by former President General Ernesto Geisel and his influential cabinet minister General Golbery do Couto e Silv (Lamounier, 1983: 1).…”

It’s my party and I’ll lie if I want to: Elite ideological obfuscation in post-authoritarian settings

“…Theoretically, Brazil is the country in which the phenomenon was previously directly observed and discussed, and as such, is the motivating case. Brazil is also very unique in that the military allowed for the functioning of Congress and restructured the party system into a simple two-party format, with one official pro-regime party and one legal opposition party (Lamounier 1984). This did not mean that parties and Congress were fully free and autonomous; they were in fact subjected to frequent tutelage and manipulation by the military executive (Desposato 2001, Kinzo 1988).…”

As teorias e o caso

“…Dois trabalhos seminais sinalizam o turning point da análise do sistema político brasileiro em direção às microinstituições indutoras da sua dinâmica. De um lado, os trabalhos de Lamounier (1984Lamounier ( , 1989 sintetizaram o diagnóstico acerca da disfuncionalidade do sistema brasileiro e a agenda de reformas necessárias para superá-la, ambos apoiados em argumentos institucionalistas acerca dos efeitos das regras de competição eleitoral e de formação de governos. Reiterando o argumento linziano, Lamounier colocou em perspectiva a análise institucionalista dos resultados políticos a partir dos atores e pontos de vetos emergentes, uma das matrizes que marcou a produção subsequente sobre o arranjo político brasileiro.…”