Opinion: Brazil’s Post-Modern Politics Part III
Opinion, by Michael Royster
RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – If post-modern literature is hard to define, so is politics; however, one of the usual components of the literature is fantasy, where the narrative injects things that are not, or could not, or should not, be true.
Brazil is facing the prospect of a post-modern government starting January 2019, based on the elections in October.
If the polls are to be believed, there are now only two candidates with any chance of winning Brazil’s presidency — Jair Bolsonaro and Fernando Haddad. Moreover, again according to the polls, both houses of the incoming Congress will be very similar in composition to the current Congress.
Both of these candidates share at least one feature: they represent political parties that currently have almost no allies in Congress. Bolsonaro’s party (PSL) has never been significant; Haddad’s party (PT) has been far too prominent, but has lost most of its prior allies.
Brazil’s 1988 Constitution has always facilitated the creation of political parties, and has, until now, never required those parties to elect members of Congress in order to receive federal funding and free air time on television. This has resulted in 35 officially recognized parties, 28 with Congressional representatives.
This plethora of parties has in turn resulted in a form of government known as “coalition presidentialism”. This is a hybrid between a truly presidential system, and a parliamentary system, because it restricts the president’s actions to those supported by a broad coalition of political parties in parliament.
This restriction encouraged the development of political strategies that sought to obtain support by fair means and foul — hence the “Mensalão” scandal, the “Petrolão” scandal and the widespread corruption uncovered by the Lava Jato investigation.
The corruption was not limited to PT, as many other parties became involved. Prominent among these are PMDB (which has its own presidential candidate) and PSDB (presidential candidate Geraldo Alckmin’s party) and numerous other parties that form Alckmin’s coalition for this election.
In other words, the winning candidate is facing a fantastic challenge: how to govern a country without having any significant support in Congress when he takes office. Furthermore, the parties that a newly-elected president would normally expect to help form a coalition presidency are now aligned with defeated presidential candidates.
How will a post-modern president deal with this challenge?
In Bolsonaro’s case, no one knows, although there are increasing signs that the “Centrão” coalition parties now aligned with Alckmin, most of which are right or center-right, will probably consent to join a new coalition aligned with Bolsonaro to implement his programs.
One can only hope that, unlike in the past, implementation will not depend on corruption.
In Haddad’s case, everyone knows what he will do. He has always been a protégé of former President Lula, and is Lula’s stalking horse in the election. He campaigns using Lula’s name and promises to implement Lula’s programs.
One can only hope that, unlike in the past, implementation will not depend on corruption.
Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Editor-in-Chief · Editorial standards · Report an error