Occupations and Chaos – Folha de S. Paulo, September 15, 1981
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
Brazil is being shaken across its entire territory by invasions and occupations of both rural and urban properties. Many readers will ask: “Shaken throughout our 8.5 million square kilometers? Isn’t this statement an exaggeration when the occupied areas are just small pockets within this vast territory?”
I respond that the destructive power of an act against the laws of God and man is judged less by the number of victims than by the severity of the violated precept and the extent of the injury. In the specific case of occupations, one of man’s fundamental natural rights, that of property, is being violated. This right arises from the natural order of things and is enshrined in the commandments of God’s Law. Moreover, it is protected by current civil laws.
I am pointing out the clear fact that the lawful owners of land or plots are being dispossessed. While such facts are only relevant at the local, personal level, land occupations go well beyond mere violations of property rights. They roughly imply that private property no longer exists. In other words, anyone can claim to be in need based on entirely subjective and arbitrary reasons and, on that basis, can freely take what belongs to others.
* * *
Just for the sake of argument, I accept here, without the essential nuances or qualifications, the principle that when someone needs something necessary and has no remedy available, they may take what belongs to others.
Additionally, just for the sake of argument, I point out the hypothesis—blatantly contrary to reality—that in this country, where about 60% of the land is uncultivated and owned by the government, the only way for a Brazilian to find space to live or work is to settle on other people’s land, instead of doing what has been practiced worldwide since the beginning of time. That is, surplus labor will take advantage of surplus land. Woe to Brazil if Portugal had not done so! And if the surplus labor force in Portugal from the 16th to the 20th century, instead of migrating to America, Africa, and Asia, had stayed within the country, dividing and subdividing smallholdings endlessly. Today, all of Portugal would be one huge, miserable slum!
Let me address those who argue that vacant land is useless for both urban and rural workers who live far from it. If they are unhappy in the megacities, where they work too hard and earn too little, and if rural workers’ wages seem insufficient, they have the right to ask the government for transportation, initial funding, tools for work, and land to live on so they can support themselves with their own labor. If that makes industries suffer, so much the worse for the negligent employer. An exodus of the needy would be the greatest strike of all.
Implementing such a solution indeed requires establishing a comprehensive land-use system, which is currently very incomplete. In reality, this issue should have been a top priority in debates among political parties and the media. However, that was not the case. The current crisis would be much milder and heading toward resolution if efforts to address the important issue of releasing political criminals and the return of exiles had instead focused on encouraging large settlement of our “hinterland” by rural and urban workers in need.
In fact, it is well known that poverty exists in the slums, but not everyone living there is destitute. On the contrary, many have radios, televisions, refrigerators, and sometimes even cars. To what extent does simply living in a slum prove that someone is needy or has the right to trespass on others’ property?
* * *
This issue could extend well beyond the scope of this article.
One thing is certain. In this particular case, this need cannot be used to infer that anyone can be the judge of their own cause, declare themselves needy, and then move onto someone else’s property.
If we accepted this rule, it would lead directly to absurdity. Indeed, why should the needy have a right only to land or property? By the same “right,” couldn’t they snatch jewelry from a woman walking down the street to sell it, take the wallet from her accompanying husband, “occupy” the car parked on the sidewalk, enter any store and “occupy” the merchandise, consume it or sell it? Why is it that only in the case of real estate does occupation seem like a feat, while in the case of other types of wealth, occupation is… “occupation”?
From this perspective, why arrest a petty thief? Can’t he also claim he’s in need?
The reader can clearly see the chaos and pandemonium that Brazil is heading towards. Led by whom?
I wholeheartedly sympathize with those who are genuinely in need. I understand that they cannot be morally compared to pickpockets and similar offenders. I feel compassion for their situation. I also support a wide redistribution of land, funded by the largest landowner in the country, which is the government (federal, state, and municipal).
I disagree that their situation should be handled by using a false principle that would throw Brazil and them into chaos and disorder. Causing chaos in Brazil can only weaken the solution I suggest, which requires order.
* * *
Then, who else do I blame if not the occupants?
The main cause of this situation is the so-called Catholic left, which has always been prepared, willing, and consistent in its support of the communist movement for about forty years.
I can confirm this. My fight against leftist infiltration in the Church started in 1943 when I was president of the Archdiocesan Board of Catholic Action. I published the book In Defense of Catholic Action specifically to warn church circles about the evil that was initially spreading.
Since then, my public effort has been a lengthy process of raising awareness about the danger. While books with large print runs were read with interest, people “left everything as it is, to see how it turns out,” as the old saying goes.
And this is the result: The so-called Catholic left is leading the occupations, followed by the poisonous little ant that is the Communist Party of Brazil.
