Democracy is a type of government in which all eligible citizens can participate in the creation and development of laws, either directly or indirectly - which is through a representative who is elected by the people.
In other words, the population will vote for the candidate they believe best represents the will of the Brazilian people, and this politician will administer the country and the laws in accordance with the demands of the population, and also with what he promised to do if he were elected.
Brazil adhered to democracy as a political model as soon as the republic was proclaimed, on November 15, 1889. It remained a democratic country for several years, until in 1964 it started the Military Dictatorship in Brazil, a regime that it brought democracy down and made the country's rulers and laws chosen by the military, not by the population.
Democracy is usually associated with two key concepts: freedom and equality. Different doses draw different forms of democracy. At one extreme, individual freedoms supersede collective rights, at the other, equality between citizens matters.
In Brazil, independence was achieved in the name of freedom. after the real family having fled the Napoleonic invasion in 1808, the colony gained prestige and, in 1815, was equated with the metropolis with the United Kingdom. But the courts of Lisbon, in 1821, intended the recolonization. Portugal lost Brazil, which was the guarantee of its importance. Rare case of liberal revolution that brought delay, giving the notion of contradictions that liberalism assumed in Portuguese lands.
The recognition of the authority of Peter I was not peaceful. In Bahia, the Portuguese resisted, with bullets. The accession of the Recôncavo lords came when they were convinced that independence would guarantee the slave model. A slave uprising in 1816 had terrified, in a region with only 20% white population. It was just the first in a series of revolts that culminated in the Malês uprising in 1835.
The constitutional monarchy was admitted as an instrument for the preservation of slavery. Of course, the European royal house was expected to help in recognizing the young nation. But the centralized formula was accepted because legal unity was essential to prevent a liberal province from unilaterally abolishing slavery. Here is the secret of Brazilian territorial unity, while Spanish America was falling apart. Here is the limit of crowned democracy.
Less than 1% of the population effectively exercised the right to vote. But the big issue throughout the empire was the tension of centralization. In the colony, the provinces did not even have a tradition of reporting to a capital. The Inconfidência was from Minas, not Brazilian. The 1817 Pernambucans defended a confederation. The theme came back soon after the granting of the centralizing Constitution of 1824, with the emergence of the Confederation of Ecuador. In 1828, Uruguay became independent from Brazil. In Pará, the Cabanagem (1835-1840) turned into rural guerrillas, killing 20% of the population. In Bahia, the Sabinada, in 1837, revolted military troops and urban rubbish. Balaiada, in Maranhão (1838-1841), became a popular guerrilla. In the south, the elite-controlled Farroupilha (1835-1845) constituted a republic. And there are those who say that Brazil has not had a bloody history.
In 1985 the military dictatorship came to an end, and when José Sarney assumed the presidency of the country, democracy was reinstated and the citizens had their freedom back and the right to participate in the political and legislative choices of the parents. This period was known as the New Republic.
The exercise of democracy was quite shaken during the dictatorship, and it was a little difficult to get back to normal after that period ended. To begin with, it was necessary to create a new constitution, with new laws to govern the country, as the laws of the dictatorship took away from the citizen all the freedom that democracy provides.
The new constitution came into force in 1988, with truly democratic laws, which is the constitution used until today in Brazil. After this constitution, there were several changes in the country, mainly political ones.
One of the changes was in relation to political parties. During the dictatorship, only two parties were allowed, and new parties with ideologies and thoughts different from what the military wanted could not be founded. This limited the population, it didn't allow them to have representatives who really listened to what the people wanted.
This changed when, after the dictatorship, other parties were allowed to be created, each political party with different ideas, and each person chooses which ideas they identify the most to know which party to vote for on elections. Giving a conscious vote is the best way to exercise democracy and help Brazil become a better country.
The country arrived in the 1980s in despair. We emerged from the dictatorship, from which the military left, dragging its thaumaturgical zeal in rags. We were plunged into an economic crisis, with inflation, default and recession. We barely talked to the outside world, and the future country it was a failure.
But in the lost decade, between mistakes and successes, there was a desire to change. Society had organized itself reasonably and the country had become urbanized. Industries and cities created their problems, but they hit the cordial man and the blurring between public and private spaces.
In 1985, the Public Civil Action Law recognized unavailable, diffuse, collective rights: a new paradigm for citizenship. The 1988 Constitution expanded social rights, with social security and habeas data two examples of the unveiled universe. The Public Ministry gained guarantees and attributions in the civil area, making it a unique institution in the world. The STF was empowered and equipped with a hybrid system for controlling the constitutionality of Brazilian-style laws. No less important is the infra-constitutional substratum that followed, with the Statute of Children and Adolescents (ECA), the Consumer Code, the Impropriety Law and the Environmental Code.
If in the political field the country had matured, moving away from the mirage of institutional rupture, in the economic field too tired of the magic, reconciled with the market and built consensus around reforms macroeconomics. The stable currency strengthened self-esteem. Growth has resumed. The specter of elitism and ideological terror were removed with the election of a worker to the presidency. Social programs have contributed to alleviating poverty. Among the big emerging countries, it managed to reconcile modernization and institutional stability. It is no small thing to have today a more reliable electoral process than that of the United States.
Violence? Less than in Mexico. Corruption? Much less than in Argentina, India, China and Russia. Does the quality of politicians fall? Less than in Italy. Bad image of politics? As much as in the US. Intolerance and racism? Far less than in most European societies. Unique speech like in Venezuela? No way.
There are multiple forums in society: companies, unions, the third sector and a reasonably free press. Robert Dahl's Polyarchy. Of course there is a lot to improve, but nothing warrants pessimism.
What's going wrong? For Dahl, the enlightened understanding - broad knowledge of the rules of the game by citizens – is essential. Centuries of a precarious educational system make this condition unfeasible here. Without real education we will not qualify the public debate. Democracy, as Stephen Holmes says, is not simply majority rule, but, above all, government that takes place through public discussion.
Subscribe to our email list and receive interesting information and updates in your email inbox
Thanks for signing up.
