Rights in Brazil: the need for a clash of citizenship
Wenceslas Alves de Souza
As the title suggests, "Citizenship in Brazil - the long way, "the book by José Murilo de Carvalho (Citizenship in Brazil - The Long Way. Second edition. RJ. Ed. Brazilian Civilization. 2002. 162 pages) respect to the advancement of citizenship in Brazil, as a historical phenomenon. The author starts his work unfold in three dimensions of citizenship: civil rights (right to liberty, property and equality before the law), political rights (right to participate citizen in corporate governance - voting) and social rights (right to education, work, fair wages, health and retirement). The overall goal of Murilo de Carvalho in Brazil is to demonstrate that there was a linkage of these three political dimensions. The right to this or that right, say the freedom of thought and the vote did not guarantee the right to other rights, for example, segurançae employment. Similarly, the worsening of social problems in India in recent years serves as a support for the author to contrast the dimensions of political rights, through universal suffrage, social rights and civil rights. The denial of these rights now and then in Brazil, is used by Historian to give support to his thesis that has historically generated in this country citizenship unfinished - as in England in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Based on studies of TA Marshall about the conquest of rights in England, the historian who first introduced the British civil rights in the eighteenth century, and only a century later - after exercise exhaustion of rights - political rights. Social rights, however, had to wait another hundred years until we did to be heard. A simplistic attempt to examine this issue by merely chronological bias would lead us, meanwhile, the erroneous simplifications. According to Murilo de Carvalho, if we did, we would be inclined to think the completeness of citizenship in Brazil as 'a matter of time' when in fact, the gap between our citizens and the British are in fact of the tripod that make citizenship, political rights, civil and social rights has been won by those people and we do it was donated, according to the particular interests of the rulers of duty. In England, the introduction of a law seemed to be linked to the full exercise of another, or was just the exercise of civil rights that made the British claimed political rights and hence social, but not really following a simple chronological order. In Brazil, the exercise of these rights does not seem to be a very frequent practice making them seem distant in its fullness.
The central problem is placed here by Murilo de Carvalho - and that seems to conflict with his attempt to permanently disfigure the chronological order as the core for the organization of a given society - that one does not follow the order English, hardly has the people in charge of their political demands. That responsibility ultimately be left to other institutions. In the Brazilian case, this task has been developed by the state. From this premise, Murilo de Carvalho explains what will be the central idea of his work arguing that the logic sequence described by Marshall was reversed in Brazil, the pyramid of rights was placed upside down. Here, social rights came first in 30 years, implanted in a period of suppression of political rights and civil rights by reducing the Getulio Vargas, a dictator who became popular - which explains in part the origin of state patronage in the country. The author notes that the lack of political freedom has always been offset by the authoritarianism of the post-30 Brazil, with the social paternalism. Performing
a historical exquisite, Murilo de Carvalho observes that the passage of the Brazilian colonial period to independence, the set of civil, social and political factors that could embryonic a state of citizens practically did not exist. The very independence has not been able to introduce radical changes in all of these rights. Although it represents an advance in respect to political rights, independence, made with the maintenance of slavery, brought themselves great limitations civil rights. There were even reverse with respect to political rights, fifty-nine years after independence, for the illiterate was no longer granted the right to vote. Thereafter, only the more affluent and educated would be able to participate in the political process.
The proclamation of the Republic in 1889, in turn, would alter the picture, it would bring little change. The Republican Constitution of 1891, in turn, would have an exclusionary character, she would continue to exclude from voting the illiterate, women, beggars, soldiers, members of religious orders. From the standpoint of the advancement of citizenship, in what regards social rights, the most significant was the movement that ended the First Republic in 1930. From independence until 1930, the only significant change was in the advance of citizenship was exactly the abolition of slavery in 1888 - ignored by the Constitution , Liberal, 1824.
Betting on the theory that only the full exercise a law can result in the acquisition of other rights, Murilo de Carvalho argues that what hindered the achievement of social rights in post-liberation of slaves was exactly the extreme limitations ; the civil rights that would last until 1930. Although the law (civil) freedom, non-slavery, was guaranteed since 1888, the spare other civil rights - and politicians - supposedly secured, were extremely precarious , which would have delayed effectively, the achievement of social rights.
The argument to support the author's thesis is that participation in national politics, including in major events, was limited to small groups, without the presence of the masses . From the earliest colonial times to 1930, there were people politically organized or consolidated national feeling. The vast majority of people had a relationship with the government or distance or antagonism. If there were political actions of the people, these were conducted as reaction to what the authorities will consider. It was a "Negative Citizenship". Until 1930, people had no place in the political system, either in the Empire, whether in the Republic, so there is no place for the introduction of such rights as the social. Therefore, the author argues, the collapse of First Republic would represent an improvement over its proclamation in 1989. Such an advance would be, if not necessary and immediately towards civil and political rights, certainly in the direction of social rights.
Murilo de Carvalho, however, true to its initial position - ignoring therefore the possibility of a certain chronological order in the advancement of rights - defined as being of very low impact the exercise of citizenship in Brazil, in the post-1930. This occurred, according to the historian, because social rights have been released before the expansion of civil rights. Advances labor, far from being conquered, were donated by a government cooptador - and later, dictatorship - whose leaders belonged to the traditional elites, without linking authenticates with popular causes. If on one hand the expansion of labor rights - social - effectively meant an advancement of citizenship in that it brought the masses into politics, however, created a mass hostage Union regional oe of its tentacles. A "grant of rights social "rather than the conquest of them, did the rights being perceived by the population as a favor, putting citizens in a position of dependence before the leaders.
What kind of citizenship would result therefrom? the author wonders, given the pyramid of Marshall did not support base in Brazil. The author's answer is that the least we can hope for is an enhancement of the Executive, to the detriment of the other two Powers. Hence the allure of the population with the use of "strong fist" of the Executive and his disregard for other branches. In addition, the state will earn a certain supremacy over civil society, which is terrible, because this relationship is drawn to the possibility of organizing a free and independent masses, in a vicious spiral, for the conquest of rights. The great dilemma that arises Murilo de Carvalho from this perspective is precisely the kind of cidadãoe company formed when the base of the pyramid described by Marshall is reversed. The conviction democratic, of course, concludes the author, is compromised because between the judiciary and the executive virtually no separation, and therefore no guarantee of the exercise of freedoms. Hence, without the exercise of freedoms, it is difficult to reach the achievement of full political rights. In Brazil, however, was reached - even odd. They were implanted in the second half of the 40s, for a military man, General Eurico Gaspar Dutra, who soon put the Brazilian Communist Party declared illegal. Still, the democratic period between 1945 and 1964 were characterized by opposing the government of Vargas. Here was an expansion of political rights and halt or slow progress of social rights. While civil rights are relegated to the background, an observer would be less careful with the impression that the logic of the pyramid of Marshall began to want to take shape. Murilo de Carvalho, however, clarifies that perception. In the period, a test of citizenship construction takes place, however, "top down" without the participation of a people truly organized. The citizen under construction here has not had time to learn to be citizens, but to treasure for strong leaders, usually the chief executive - whether the assertion is true Murilo de Oak that Vargas was elected senator from two States in that period, and 'back in the arms of the people' in 1951 for the presidency.
Nineteen years after the fall of the Vargas dictatorship in 1964, admitted by the apathy of most popular Brazilian citizens, civil and political rights would be severely stifled by new measures of repression. This time, the example of the Proclamation of the Republic, taken by military leadership. The military governments in interpreting Murilo de Carvalho, would repeat the tactics of the New State: ie, while some civil and political rights, have invested in the expansion of social rights. This time, however, the organs of political representation have been transformed into mere decorative scheme, they, in practice, were not representative of anything or anyone.
In the passage of analysis of the 1964 movement, Murilo de Carvalho arises the question: Why democracy foundered in 1964, if conditions were so favorable to its consolidation , the? The author suggests that the answer may lie in the lack of democratic conviction of the elites of both left and right. According to the author the two sides have engaged in a race for control of the government which left the practice of democracy. Murilo de Carvalho, however, careful with this statement. Not to escape to his thesis, the historian says that the lack of democratic persuasion does not suffice to explain the behavior of leaders. The answer is probably more consistent in the fact that Brazil does not count at the time of the coup, with strong civil organizations and representative that could curb the course of radicalization - throughout the organization, trade union, student, institutional, is just a "sand castle" on the verge of collapse in the lower woodwinds. Here, the author once again confirms its belief that when the rights are not exercised they can fully prevent the advance in direçãoa other rights.
After 1985, when the demise of the military, civil rights established before the military regime, such as freedom of speech, press and organization, were recovered. Still, many civil rights the base sequence of Marshall, remain inaccessible to most people. Still, the crux of the problem remains far from being chronological. The odd shape and the rights - that support the idea of citizenship - have been introduced or abolished in Brazil is what makes the difference. And while political rights have acquired breadth never before achieved, since 1988, political democracy has not solved the problems more urgent, such as inequality and unemployment. Remain the problems of the social area and there was an aggravation of the situation of civil rights in regard to personal safety.
Murilo de Carvalho noted that, probably due to the inversion of the pyramid of Marshall - because of the lack of enjoyment of rights by the people - the cycle of responsible duties ; bodies responsible for acquisition of citizenship in Brazil, if completed, but fail to achieve broad share of the population. If nothing else, at the time that the cycle of rights seem to take shape in Brazil, the rapid changes in the international economy threaten this condition, as they demand the reduction will the size of the state - a promoter of civil rights. The
ConclusionThe arriving Murilo de Carvalho is that the right to this or that right - suppose, freedom of thought and to vote - is not guaranteed right to other rights - let us suppose, safety, and employment - which has historically generated in the case of Brazil, an inconclusive citizenship. The author tries to show that the guarantee of civil or political rights in Brazil were far, and are to represent a resolution of many social problems here - and the converse is true -; they march, the second author in disparate speeds. The intensification of the latter, incidentally, has proved beyond a peg need these three policy dimensions; liable, including, in many cases, reverse or advance one or another, some for the convenience of the condition.
0 comments:
Post a Comment