In this well-constructed, clearly argued study of Brazilian politics from 1964 to 1983, Moreira Alves concentrates on the changing relationship of the state and its opposition, especially in the shaping of what she calls the “national security state.” She traces the origins of this state in the theory of national security and development, which, she argues, is an important tool for maintaining state structures that support a particular form of associated-dependent capitalist development. She carefully examines the elaboration of the doctrine of national security and development, especially in the Escola Superior de Guerra, emphasizing the economic as well as the political content of this doctrine, and underlines its importance in both the buildup to the coup of 1964 and the elaboration of the development model followed by those who now came to power.
In the discussion of dependency, national security, and the forces behind the coup, there is little that is really new, since the basic concepts of the Manual básico and the central arguments of theorists such as General Golbery do Couto e Silva have been carefully examined elsewhere, as have the links with such groups as IPES and IBAD. In this respect, the theoretical basis of the book, however valid it may be, is relatively thin. There is little or no reference to the wide-ranging Marxist debate on the role of the state, especially as this may be applied to Brazil. The same is true for the whole body of literature on “new authoritarianism,” which, whatever its weaknesses, would seem relevant to a study which turns so heavily on an essentially Marxist concept of the state in capitalist society. The book would have been strengthened if the author had justified more fully and clearly the linkages she sees between the particular form of Brazil’s political economy in the early 1960s and the repressive state which emerged from the coup of 1964. There could have been more discussion of the nature of civil society and its specific relation to the state in the period under scrutiny, and some more careful distinction between civil society and “opposition,” which are separate in the introduction but seem almost synonymous in subsequent discussions.
The great strength of the book, once one accepts the basic theoretical premise, is its scrupulously researched and carefully presented account of the growth of the national security state, often in reaction to and as a further attempt to curb and control opposition groups within society. At every point, the author backs up her argument with reference to a rich range of primary and secondary sources and to interviews with political actors at every level, both in government and opposition, within the state apparatus and across society.
Unfortunately, the book does not have a bibliography, but the densely packed footnotes and the excellent range of tables and appendixes give solid backing to the analysis which Moreira Alves presents. The appendixes on such relevant matters as income distribution and the changing pattern of strikes provide important new material for the years which are covered, and there are some excellent analyses of political party structure and the key elections of the period, including that of November 1982.
Having examined the origins and development of the national security state, the author presents an important, detailed account of the emergence of groups within civil society, especially in the period of abertura. She is particularly illuminating on the grassroots organizations, including the comunidades eclesiais de base (CEBs), on the development of the new union movement and the strikes of 1978 to 1980, as well as the increasingly important political role of such other groups as the associações de moradores. Her judgment is always sound, and she does not let her enthusiasm for these organizations outweigh her doubts with regard to the shaping of the opposition, especially the difficulty of developing strong political parties. Writing before the death of Tancredo Neves and the start of the New Republic, she emphasizes that parties are still fragile and that the opposition, despite its popular support and legitimacy, has not yet organized itself effectively in the face of what still remains a strong, authoritarian state. One key question is how far the elements in civil society, despite their long and courageous defiance of the repressive state, are yet capable of transforming the political system.
This is a most welcome, thoroughly researched study, which makes an important contribution to the historiography of modern Brazil.
