The Rise of the Left, a Political Mirage (1) – Folha de S. Paulo, January 16, 1989

by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

1. It has been forty days since I last submitted my column to Folha de S. Paulo. This delay was caused by a feeling that is very rare for me: hesitation. I am not quick to make decisions; on the contrary, I carefully weigh my options before choosing. Yet, before writing this article, I truly hesitated. In the end, however, I speak out — now convinced that I must.

The subject of my reflection was the current political landscape—the political nightmare, one could say—in which the country finds itself. My impression of this is strange. Here it is.

Quite simply, I believe that a series of circumstances has been creating an unreal danger within the national political landscape—one made up entirely of strange coincidences and fanciful interpretations of the facts. Yet, this is a danger that could potentially turn into a source of success for those who know how to exploit it. In serious and critical situations like the one our country currently faces, illusions can have a stronger impact than reality. All of this is deeply destabilizing to what still remains stable in our socio-political and socioeconomic landscape.

Vigorous propaganda efforts have long been in place to create the illusion that the masses in the country are victims of severe deprivation. This deprivation is said to be causing widespread and troubling signs of unrest, both in rural areas and cities. In turn, this unrest is being “exploited” solely for the benefit of the left, especially the PT, the Basic Christian Communities (BCCs), and the Communist Parties.

Indeed, the Brazilian Communist Party and the Communist Party of Brazil would be the main beneficiaries of this entire situation, because any uprising that gains strength tends to become more radical and move toward the most extreme positions. Therefore, the length of the current economic collapse would be a crucial factor in increasing the number of communists, who until recently were very few.

In fact, during the elections for the Constituent Assembly, only six openly communist deputies were elected, and even then, only through coalitions between the Communist Parties and the majority party, forming nothing more than an insignificant minority within the large assembly of 559 congressmen and senators. Three other PC do B candidates succeeded only by hiding their communist ties under another political party’s name.

Therefore, electing these communist parliamentarians does not demonstrate their popularity but shows communism’s unpopularity. Fears of a possible Communist Party win thus vanish like a soap bubble.

However, the prophets of destabilization and chaos argue that the communists would likely achieve astonishing success in a future election, thanks to the immense media hype surrounding the people’s “misery.”

2. According to the propaganda of these “prophets,” the recent municipal elections—especially in São Paulo—were supposed to be a strong confirmation of the left’s progress. All the more because inflation has been spiraling out of control. As for me, I have doubts about how effective the new package is in this regard.

This entire perspective on our recent past and upcoming near future is likely to have significant implications for the November election, when the country’s new president will be selected.

There is no reason to expect an improvement in the country’s economic situation. Given this, no matter how severe our economic conditions are, people tend to see the status quo as a somewhat acceptable lesser evil. Still, keeping the status quo would only encourage revolt and the left’s march toward communism. Therefore, the victory of any candidate who is not a leftist would, in any case, become impossible.

As a result, some in bourgeois circles quietly argue that their ultimate political move is simply to pick the least radical candidate among the leftists. Since the mass media have only shown the Lula–Brizola–Covas trio as viable leftist contenders, the bourgeoisie has no choice but to support the least leftist of them.

A difficult conundrum indeed — and, above all, a rather unpleasant one. In any case, the bourgeoisie (I do not consider it “centrist,” let alone “right-wing,” since most of it has no ideology and almost all of it yields to the opportunism of panic) will end up aligning with one of the three left-wing electoral groups. And whoever wins will do so because of the left’s strength.

However, only one thing really matters to Brazil: recognizing that the communist left is consuming the nation entirely.

In light of this, the question of which leftist within that triad this strange amalgam of bourgeois panic and leftism will entrust — through the ballot box — with the beheading of the current socioeconomic regime matters infinitely less.

3. To me, this bourgeois panic — so essential for a leftist victory — seems clearly caused by one of those clever advertising illusions that the left has always mastered. And in the face of these illusions, the center has been blinded… as have nearly all right-wingers, too.

I have just described this game of illusions to clarify it further. In doing so, I will not discuss the exact details of the economic crisis. My knowledge on this matter is no more than that of any “man on the street.” Using common sense—which is both the defining trait of the “man on the street” and his best defense against the exaggerations of the mass media—I note a sense of contradiction in these surreal images of national suffering.

For example, I don’t understand how Brazil in 1987, despite being “in the throes of increasing poverty,” was promoted from eighth to seventh place on the list of countries with growing economies, as reported by the press (see Folha de S. Paulo, Dec. 23, 1988).

Nor do I understand how such poverty can coexist with the huge crowds filling countless planes, cars, buses, and trains whenever two or three consecutive holidays arrive — or how Brazilians, even those counted among the poorest, happily head to beaches, mountains, and other rural destinations.

Given the contradiction between everything we can feel, see, and smell at every moment regarding inflation, the least I can say is that it doesn’t match the festive scene of the mass vacations I just mentioned. Something seems clearly distorted in the descriptions of poverty we hear in the media or in conversations. While our reality is more complex and nuanced than these descriptions suggest, these nuances and complexities are stubbornly and systematically silenced.

Now, stripping this picture of its nuances silently denies the truth: “la vérité est dans les nuances.” The truth is in the nuances, as the French correctly say.

In this particular case, who benefits from this systematic removal of nuance? The left. It exaggerates the severity of the situation, causing panic among non-leftists and outrage among leftists. Only the left stands to gain from this. Ultimately, the far left…

In the next article, the reader will learn important concrete data on this issue.