Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[ClarissaMach]

Actually, this is a translation from part of an article.

Is it ok?

It is not exactly meant to be inteligible, since it is marked by Brazilian social sciences rethoric...

At first, it is important to establish that all this intellectual production was made in a context of crisis of thought in the Brazilian social sciences, marked by the imperious necessity of explaining the coup of 1964 and, in order to make it, of revising the interpretations so far shared and used as guides for policy making. In this respect, one can understand not only the reaction against an analytics paradigm that resorted to causes of structural substance (especially socio-economic causes), as equally, the option for an approach that will privilege the political actors and that will place them, also, as targets of criticism for choices made in strategic moments for the course of Brazil�s history. That is the reason for the combative tone of several texts, the debates they provoke and the emergence of a �national bourgeoisie� and the syndical movement no longer in the comfortable position of promoters of the country�s development. This is also the reason for the centrality of the actor State and, no doubt, the theme of populism, articulator above all of this fundamental triad.

Simplifying a lot, we can say that for Weffort populism is the product of a long transformation process of the Brazilian society, set up from the Revolution of 1930 on, and which unfolds in a double way: as a governing style and as mass politics.

Assuming a clear historic perspective, his analysis falls upon the building of two times for the research of the referred process. The time of the �origins� of populism, which will take him to a study on the nature of the Revolution of 1930 and the political confrontations that come from it; and the time of the populist republic of 1945-1964, with the experimentation of the liberal-democracy. Regarding the origins, the point here is signaling the crisis of the Brazilian oligarchic liberalism and the necessity of institutional enlargement of the State�s social basis of power. That does not mean, nonetheless, understanding the event of 1930 as a bourgeoisie revolution, but rather defining it as a transformation still headed by oligarchic forces, able to produce varied political alliances. Between these alliances, there are rapprochements to industrial sectors not much economically and politically articulated, as well as to the so called urban middle classes and also the rising popular classes.
_________________
Stormy Weather.