This is a provocative book which analyzes political aspects of the democratic crisis in Brazil and offers suggestions on how the country could be better governed. Nostalgically, the author firmly believes that Brazil was best governed during the Dom Pedro II period when the moderating power functioned to its fullest.
Part one considers an ideal democracy and the problems inherent in such a system. Part two, “Democracy in Brazil,” the best in the entire book, will help many understand why Brazil will and must travel such a different political path from that of the United States. There is an undercurrent of approval and defense of the 1964 revolution when the author writes that at times situations have developed in Brazil where it has become necessary to temporarily sacrifice political democracy in order to save basic democratic values.
All political systems are created basically in two ways according to Saldanha Souza Jr. One would be the situation in which nations are formed from the bottom up. In other words the people create the government under which they wish to live as in the case of the United States. The other type of government is formed from the top down. Brazil, according to the author, is one of the most radical and dramatic examples of a political structure coming into operation long before the people developed any national consensus or sense of political community. Constitutions were delivered to Brazilians in 1824, 1937, and 1969. Even those written by constituent assemblies in 1891, 1934, and 1946 were basically an attempt to limit state power in relation to the people. But the most damaging aspect of the Brazilian political system is found in the decree laws which supersede any existing constitution. The author warns that AI 5 and any other decree law has the potential of creating serious counterrevolutionary activity.
Public opinion is rarely mobilized as Brazil has no tradition of community action nor do formal or informal political pressure groups function effectively. If Brazilians were to act the way North Americans did during the crisis surrounding President Richard Nixon and the Watergate scandal they would have been considered subversive and enemies of the government. And they would have been quickly eliminated. Another difference between Brazilians and Americans concerns attitudes toward government authority. Brazilians have always looked at the state as a wise and helpful parent rather than the object of suspicion and hostility—the view of North Americans about their government.
Part three discusses the inadequate political institutions that make it so difficult in Brazil to have a democratically functioning government. The presidency, political parties, and the armed forces are singled out for discussion. The final section is an attempt to answer some of the problems presented. The suggestion is made that Brazil needs a president who would act as a supreme moderating power—a national ombudsman who would work for the best interests of all Brazilians. It all sounds very dreamy and impractical.
