Utopias and public experience in democracy – A conversation between FHC and F. Gabeira
“As much as we criticize democracy, it is much better to live in one. In a dictatorship, we live in fear. At this moment, it is necessary to take a clear stance against authoritarian abuses, inside and outside Brazil,” said former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso. “We must step up at this crucial moment against the quiet coup that is underway in the country. It is gradually undermining our institutions. To stop this process, we must advocate for the unity of all democratic forces,” said journalist Fernando Gabeira.
This dialogue between the two Fernandos was part of the cycle “Um Intelectual na Política” (An Intellectual in Politics), which marked FHC’s 90th birthday, celebrated on June 18, and the release of his eponymous memoir, published by Companhia das Letters. At the meeting, they spoke about their intellectual and political backgrounds, influences, experiences in their youth, and their work later in life as adults. They exchanged ideas about the Cuban Revolution, Marx, Sartre and existentialism, the coup of 1964 in Brazil, exile, May of 1968, environmentalism, the Diretas Já movement, identity politics, advances and setbacks in Brazil’s democratic history.
“Gabeira is ten years younger than me. That makes a difference in youth and an even bigger difference now in old age. His generation believed in Cuba and in the idea of a socialist revolution. Disappointed by Stalin’s crimes, my generation was more skeptical. Personally, I have always had a more institutional stance, one of fighting for the country’s redemocratization by playing by the rules, with no disruptions. This does not mean being conservative or reactionary. As a sociologist, I have always been mindful of transformations. Changes only happen when society takes action. I saw this up close in France in May 1968, when students took to the streets for more freedom and justice,” said Cardoso.
“I grew up in a working-class neighborhood in Juiz de Fora (state of Minas Gerais), and at the age of 17 or 18, I got involved in student activism. At that time, I revered Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir and existentialism. After the coup in 1964, like other young leftists, I thought confronting the military regime was necessary. I joined the armed struggle, was arrested and exiled (in 1970). Upon arriving in Europe, I came into contact with other movements that did not exist in Brazil: the struggle of women, homosexuals, environmental awareness. I thought that those elements should be part of a more progressive agenda here too,” said Gabeira.
Upon returning to the country in 1979, under the Amnesty Law, Gabeira published “O que é isso, companheiro?” (colloquially, What are you doing, comrade?). In the book, Gabeira recounts his experience as a militant joining the armed struggle, in particular in the kidnapping of the American ambassador Charles Elbrick in 1969, while also offering critical and self-critical reflections on the Marxist-Leninist left. In the 1980s, he became an important voice in the defense of the causes of minorities and the environment and, in 1989, he ran for president of Brazil under the Green Party. In 1994, he was elected to the Lower House of Parliament and served several terms, some as a member of the Green Party and others as a member of the Workers’ Party. After leaving politics, he started to work exclusively as a journalist and writer.
‘Identity politics without proper mediation’
Although he was a pioneer of the so-called identity politics, Gabeira criticized the way it has been conducted in the political arena over the last two decades in Brazil. “American political scientist Mark Lilla claims that the great growth of identity struggles in the United States in this century was responsible for Trump’s victory (in 2016) because those who did not belong to any specific identity group were forgotten, as well as country-level agendas that are relevant to the entire population. I think something similar happened here and it partly explains Bolsonaro’s election,” he said.
According to the journalist, “the recent left-wing administrations absorbed these agendas, but they did not have a clear vision for them. So, their policy became the policy advocated for by identity movements, while in fact there must be mediation between State policies and the rest of society. This process opened room for the right to create fictions that helped his victory in 2018.”
As an example, he mentioned sex education in schools: “It is a very important proposal, but as Brazil is a very conservative country, its introduction requires negotiation with the families, who want to have authority over the education of their children. The proposal was not properly introduced.”
“Identity issues are important, but not everything revolves around them; there are issues at the national, international and even global level. As a president, I tried to advance on issues such as the fight against racism and women’s rights, while avoiding creating unnecessary conflicts. When dealing with identity, you have to be cautious, understand the context, otherwise you will be at risk of ending up isolated,” Cardoso agreed.
The former president added that “there are so many new things happening in the world, and politicians need to be in contact with young people, or else they will become fossils.” “Before the pandemic, the Foundation used to receive visits from public and private school students. I see a lot of will in them to fight for a better Brazil. Politicians need to talk to young people, recognize their mistakes, reconsider their ideas. It is not easy to put yourself out there, but it is important to establish a connection with the youth.”
Unity for democracy
Both speakers said they are in favor of a candidate representing the center in the 2022 presidential election. “I am in favor of a third option, but somebody has to take matters into their own hands. Who will be able to take this role? I want to see the pre-candidates out there step up. They need to step up with conviction, otherwise it will not happen,” said Cardoso.
“Mr. President, what would you say to those who claim that your recent meeting with former president Lula killed the third option?” asked political scientist Sergio Fausto, who was moderating the meeting. “I am a political being, I talk to whomever I have to talk to, especially in difficult moments. I have known Lula for over 40 years. I do not always agree with him, but I never refused to meet with him. Lula and I have one thing in common: when he was president, he did not try to undermine democracy; neither did I. We have to come together to stand up for democracy now, while we can still speak our minds freely,” he answered.
“Fernando Henrique does not need to come in the rescue of a third option, because it would be artificial. For a third option to materialize we will need candidates to embody it. Where is the center politician who can engage with their constituency with charisma and effectiveness?,” said Gabeira.
As an example of unity between different camps, the journalist mentioned the recent agreement between left and right parties in Israel, which removed the powerful Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu from office after 12 years. He also recalled the broad opposition front formed in Hungary in 2019, which resulted in the election of Gergely Karácsony as mayor of Budapest, a major political defeat for Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who has been ruling the country with an iron fist since 2010.
“There are times when it is necessary to put differences aside and strive towards convergence. The heterogeneous forces committed to democracy need to engage in dialog because democracy is under threat. This is the moment for the democratic field to unite,” concluded Gabeira.
Otávio Dias is a journalist specializing in politics and international affairs. A former correspondent for Folha in London and editor of the estadao.com.br website, he is currently the content editor at Fundação FHC.
Portuguese to English translation by Marília Aranha.