Brazil’s Conflict Paper
Brazil’s transformation from an authoritarian regime to a presidential democracy was a slow and faltered attempt. From the early suggestions of democratic development, there were both administrations that contributed to democratic growth, as well as administrations that opposed this liberalization. This led to instability in the Brazilian form of democratic government, their economy, and their political parties. The people’s reactions to these instabilities confirm the fact that the Brazilian democratic regime was not working effectively. Although Brazil was governed under a democratic system because the president was chosen by the people, the president rarely acted in a democratic manner.
Thefirst signs of a modern democratic government in Brazil appeared in 1945 when the military deposed President Getulio Vargas. Vargas had created an authoritarian regime (the Estado N;vo) based largely on the military. Once Vargas had been removed from power, Brazil instituted a competitive multi-party system. Multi-party systems are not a requirement for democracy, but democratization has been associated with the development of parties.
This step towards a true democratic government was negated in 1964 when the military forced a reversion to an authoritarian form of rule. The president remained the top government official, but he was merely a puppet to the military. The Army officer corps choose a general who the Congress would elect for president for a set term.
Castelo Branco managed to hold the hardliners demands at bay with the enactment of concessions. To make his successor’s transition to office easier, Castelo Branco and his advisers reformed the constitution so that the next president could assume power in a “normal” constitutional regime.
General Artur da Costa e Silva took over as President in 1967. He experienced an average economic growth of eleven percent per year, which lasted from 1968 until 1974. However, the polit…