by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
Even more convincing than the extensive conjecture I outlined in my recent article on the mirage now appearing before Brazilians in support of the left (Folha de S. Paulo, January 16, 1989) are the tangible facts on this issue, which I will examine and analyze in today’s article.
-
Starting in 1986, the TFP decisively refuted the leftist myth — which had spread widely across our vast country — that large numbers of starving rural workers roamed the countryside with their families looking for work and food. Failing to find either, they would supposedly invade the rural properties they considered most “suitable” and settle on uncultivated land, taking from the unused soil whatever was necessary for their survival.
Of course, the plunderers paid the farmer nothing, invoking the principle — admittedly quite fair in itself, though wrongly applied here — that a hardworking man who lacks the money to buy bread may take the bread he finds, without payment, since his right to life takes precedence over the owner’s right to his bread.
But were the members of these hordes — which the police seemed never to suppress, and which parish priests and even some bishops fervently incited — truly in need of bread? Or were these so-called poor people, in fact, rioters hired, herded, and sustained in their vagabond and aggressive roaming along the roads, then incited and directed by unknown agents at the moment of occupation?
Careful observation of the news within the TFP led us to the firm conviction that, upon thorough analysis, this latter hypothesis held the truth.
One reason led us to this conclusion. If these hordes were truly made up of genuine farmers without bread, they would be a clear sign of widespread destitution and rebellion across the country’s farmlands. If that were true, the arrival of these so-called hordes on the farms they occupied would immediately rely on the support of the local rural workers already on the land. Both groups would unite to split the farm among themselves and remove the callous, irresponsible owner from his land.
Yet in the numerous news reports we examined in the press — whether from megacities, medium-sized towns, or small towns — we found no mention of such incidents. Neither did farm workers rebel against their employers. And the “starving” members of the invading hordes always came from outside, completely external to the employer–employee relationship that existed peacefully in the invaded area.
It was therefore crucial to halt this widespread looting and prevent a de facto land reform from illegally overtaking Brazil based on a myth of extreme — yet nonexistent — poverty.
To this end — with most rural landowners lacking police support — it was up to the farmers themselves to take up arms against the invasion of these so-called “wretched” squatters.
To ensure farmers fully understand this right, the TFP relied on the valuable legal opinions of two prominent Brazilian jurists, Dr. Silvio Rodrigues and Dr. Orlando Gomes, professors at the Law Schools of the Universities of São Paulo and Bahia, respectively. Both opinions demonstrated this right with undeniable clarity, drawing on the expertise and persuasive power of their distinguished authors.
The TFP then took it upon itself to spread these statements across the country — a task heroically carried out by its members and volunteers, supported by our friends in hundreds of communities.
The outcome? The uprising ended, the noise of the “hungry” quieted, and the hordes disappeared from the map. On the farms — where the vast majority of workers lived happily and in harmony with the farmers — peace returned.
Apart from a few areas where the old turmoil appears to have resurfaced, rural Brazil stays calm.
What we witnessed was yet another artificial and sensationalized portrayal of the condition of rural workers, crafted to present a reform that the facts themselves showed to be unjust as fair.
-
The same thing happened recently with the municipal elections. I don’t have the time to analyze the results of all the elections held in the 4,307 municipalities of the Brazilian Federation, so let’s focus only on the most significant one — that of our own São Paulo, the country’s most populous city.
Here, the election of a strongly PT-aligned mayor sparked a nationwide outcry over an alleged electoral victory of the left — a victory in which many Brazilians began to see the first step in an unstoppable rise of the impoverished masses, drawn through the PT’s ideological spiral toward the abyss of communist collapse. It was in this context that Ms. Erundina, until recently a notable figure in the Basic Christian Communities and in some PT circles, suddenly became a national celebrity.
Let’s take a look at the official election data.
-
Erundina was the candidate with the highest number of votes, receiving 1,534,547 ballots.
-
The number of registered voters was 5,528,404.
-
Therefore, the new mayor was elected by just over a quarter (27.76%) of the electorate.
-
The remaining three‑quarters (excluding abstentions and blank or invalid votes) were divided among other parties — some with more clearly defined ideological positions than others, yet none with a stance as sharply delineated as that of Mayor Erundina.
-
Furthermore, we all know that in Brazil, the electoral weight of ideological positions ceased to be significant once the Republican Constitution of 1891 explicitly prohibited the formation of monarchist factions or parties, and the Republican parties — which were ideologically homogeneous at the time — started to divide solely based on personal criteria of coronelismo and cabresto then in force.
Since then, voting based solely on personal likability has become a national political vice, to the point that today, candidates’ photographs often serve as the only basis on which many voters decide whom to support.
In a sermon published in Jornal do Brasil (May 18, 1988), Bishop Angélico Sândalo Bernardino of São Paulo’s East Zone bitterly acknowledged the ideological indifference of the Landless Workers Movement: “I have never witnessed such widespread apathy among the people as I do now. … I have always opposed the hegemony of Church leaders in popular movements, which should be directed by their own leadership, respecting pluralism. But today, if the Church leaves, the movement ends.”
I do not believe — nor can anyone with common sense believe — that Lula’s agents’ ideological preaching could have achieved better results among the masses, especially when a bishop’s demagogic talents produced such limited effects.
What, then, is the real ideological meaning of the PT’s and Ms. Erundina’s electoral victory? To say the least, the outcome is quite ambiguous.
But the myth that circulated was another: a victory for the left, supposedly reflecting Brazil as a whole. And from this myth, a dangerous influence spreads, shaping the atmosphere around this November’s presidential election.
-
It is strange that all of this should happen purely to benefit the Workers’ Party and the left in general. Still, I ask readers whether this isn’t exactly how events have been developing—and whether they won’t continue to unfold with even greater intensity unless new voices echo mine through the mass media.