JB’s Authoritarian Centrism – Folha de S. Paulo, August 13, 1983

by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

In a news report on French Foreign Minister Claude Cheysson’s visit, the well‑known Jornal do Brasil—a self‑proclaimed centrist publication based in Rio—devoted a 103‑line section to the question posed by the Boa Imprensa News Agency (Abim) reporter that I transcribed in a previous article. In that report, the writer managed to slip in the following criticisms.

1. The Abim news agency is an “unknown entity.” This is pseudo-centrist journalistic cronyism! In reality, this agency has been operating for thirty years and regularly distributes its news and editorials to 130 newspapers across Brazil that publish them, as the “centrist” reporter could have seen in the book Tradition, Family Property, a Half Century of Epic Anticommunism, with four editions and 39,000 copies sold (Editora Vera Cruz, São Paulo, 1980, p. 187). “Unknown”? To him, yes. But it is unbecoming for him to identify himself with the world and declare that it is unknown to the whole world.

2. This “centrist” reporter later learned that Abim—horresco referens!—is “managed by the TFP.” So what? It’s fair to say that this inquisitive centrist has uncovered the obvious, as it is stated in the very text Abim distributed to the press at the time.

3. According to that same reporter, the Abim representative asked a “pseudo-question.” This is a new concept. Everyone knows what a question is. So, what would a pseudo-question be? It would be a question that asks nothing. Let the reader look at the text of the previous article and see if it isn’t a typical question. The question was so genuine that, a little further on, the reporter himself admits that Mr. Cheysson answered it “with some apprehension.”

4. The reporter continues: “The TFP referred to ‘a key point of the program with which the French Socialist Party came to power’ (as the copy of the question shows, this did not refer to class struggle, a concept introduced by the translator).” A lot is hanging on this thin branch. Firstly, the statement that the translator added something of his own to Mr. Takahashi’s thoughts smacks of distortion. The reality is different. At a certain point in the response, the Abim representative, through his interpreter, reminded Foreign Minister Cheysson that the question also mentioned class struggle, an essential element of socialist thought and strategy, which the minister skillfully avoided addressing. The French foreign minister retorted that he knew perfectly well what he was saying: he had spoken of human rights, not of class struggle. And he went on to discuss the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua, leaving aside the issue of class struggle…

By spreading socialist propaganda outside France, the French government implicitly or explicitly encourages class struggle in other countries. It is therefore understandable that Mr. Cheysson was so eager to avoid the question. This explains the Abim representative’s polite insistence on the issue.

All of this is documented, so arguing against it would be pointless.

Probably sensing the inconsistency of his anti-TFP attack, the reporter still dedicates considerable space to a matter already clarified by the TFP two years ago: the expenses incurred in publishing the Message of the Thirteen TFPs, the text of which I had the honor of authoring.

At this point in the article, I realize I have gone well over the allotted space. I’ll need to cut down the text. I also notice that a bit of irony—present in my references to the comments “perched” on the Jornal do Brasil article—will become even more obvious. With that said, a clarification.

I am naturally averse to irony because of my temperament, upbringing, and disposition; it is not part of my intentions, even though it sometimes appears in my writing. My brevity comes purely from a desire to be concise, and irony, after all, often simplifies an argument.

In reality, I merely wanted to point out to the reporter from Jornal do Brasil—presumably a young man full of enthusiasm and a hint of bitterness—that the methods and style he used make it impossible for a school of thought lacking the huge capital needed to publish a major daily to confidently and respectfully present its views to that newspaper’s readership. This effectively limits the freedom of expression for us and denies Jornal do Brasil’s readers access to the perspectives of a significant part of national opinion represented by the TFP. In short, this is press censorship—centrist authoritarianism practiced by those working for a media outlet with vast resources against those with far fewer.

This amounts to a centrist dictatorship—not enforced by Bonaparte’s brute force, but through the subtle pressure of capital.