Marxist Revolution During Brazil s Military. Dictatorship

Transcription

1 Marxist Revolution During Brazil s Military Dictatorship Dominique M. Awis February 11, 2017 Introduction Massive demonstrations occurred all over Brazil where people shared a common identity of antimilitary sentiment and Marxist values. The social structure of Brazil had shifted from one of outrage to one of collective motion. Brazilians formed a massive labor movement in Brazil and started voting en masse as an act of protest. This gave way to the PT party in Brazil where the labor movement now had new resources, leadership, and organization to bargain with the state. The PT party lead to the fall of the military regime in Brazil and paved the way for socialist democracy with the protest vote that would eventually oust the military regime. It is important to note that Marxism has close theoretical ties to Communism although there are differences. Socialism holds a new world system would replace Capitalism through the states official channels, while Communism holds change would erupt breaking the existing form of government. Marxism was initially an epistemological framework before becoming a set of social and economic values. This paper will chart the rise and fall of Brazil s military dictatorship. The paper will seek to explain what factors brought the democracy to the country and what drove the Marxist social movement against the military regime. The paper will also seek to explain what factors caused the Marxist guerilla revolutionary movement to end, what outcome and why the Marxist revolution was a success or failure. The hypothesis guiding the paper is whether or not the independent variable, 1

2 the Marxist social movement had on the dependent, the fall of the military dictatorship. This will be an example of epistemological individualism when studying the behaviors of individuals in groups and a methodical holistic approach to theory when investigation institutions. 1 Military Dictatorship 1.1 The Fall of Joo Goulart Joao (Jango) Belchior Marques Goulart was installed as head of the Labor Party in Brazil in He was a fellow gacho and close friend to the former labor movement s leader Getulio Dornelles Vargas. [1] The Labor Party, Partido Trabalhista Brasileiro, or PTB, as it was known, was loyal to Vargas Estado Novo, socialist democracy state. [1] The initial goal in the group s formation was to organize a group of working class citizens who would be loyal to Vargas regime. [2] The group was not a Communist group was created to avoid a Communist takeover of the state although the group shared Marxist values. The PTB was formed in 1945 and is an institutional organization made up of individuals that have a common goal and interests. The goals of the PTB was social democracy under the theory capitalism such that government programs must be enacted to counter capitalisms resultant exploitations. The PTB was a working class movement such that the individuals share the common interest of worker s rights and benefits under the exploitative conditions of capitalism. [2] Worker s parties bargained for higher wages and better working conditions. Brazil has a long history where rural and working class individuals collectively mobilize around labor or land respectively. The PTB, or Labor Party, was a decision-making organization that participated in the policy process and therefore a structural entity. Labor Party mobilized workers, distributed patronage, acted in opposition to its enemies, and rewarded loyalists by creating jobs. [1] Many of the PTB were known as trabalhistas or Communist union leaders. [2] Unions were very powerful during this period. The PTB organized strike movements and work stoppages. [2] Strikes and worker stoppages are forms of bargaining with elites and authority. The strikes and stoppages were often successful. In 1958 there was a recorded 31 strikes. [2] Important agents in the Labor Party of Brazil were union elites, the institutional Ministry of Labor, industrial bourgeoisie inclined towards 2

3 nationalism, and urban union workers. [2] Goulart later became president of Brazil in 1961 after Kubitschek s term despite opposition from the Brazilian military. [3] The military held the view Goulart s administration would open a door for Communism to seep through. [2] The military was against the Goulart Administration s reforms such that they viewed his Administration as a threat to national security. Brazil during this period was facing massive urban growth and industrialization. [2] Goulart installed new reforms in purpose to curb the social pressure of workers and groups such as agrarian reform and urban reform. Agrarian reform was enacted in purpose to settle disputes over land while urban reform allowed tenants to remain in their homes. [2] Additionally, the Goulart Administration focused on more nationalistic framework such that government would take a stronger position in economic matters to curb the social problems caused from economic policies. [2] Goulart increased the minimum wage and salaries of workers. [4] These reforms were supported by the educated middle class of Brazil. [2] The Brazilian government was facing greater public crisis during this period. Economic conditions were driving individuals to unionize causing them to mobilize. Worker s strikes continued up to 172 in [2] Mobilizations occurred both from agrarian and urban groups. [2] This pressured the government on the social front. With growing public and private sector mobilization, the government face continuing crisis. On the agrarian front, landowners were beginning to take up arms afraid of government seizures and peasant leagues were on the rise. [2] Students were protesting in massive demonstrations. [2] The Brazilian government was facing heavy social pressures from contentious mobilizations on many fronts. During this period, anti-goulart sentiment was growing in the Brazilian military along with other supporters against Goulart s measures. [2] The military held certain principles: maintaining social order, respect for hierarchy, and controlling Communism. [2] There was a revolt within the military in 1963 which was a crisis for Goulart s regime. [2] The military was growing in number against Goulart and his reforms. The military thought Goulart was Communistic in principle. Anti- Goulart propaganda was passed through military barracks. [5] Goulart s presidency only lasted from 1961 to [6] The military overthrew Goulart in an act to free the country from corruption and Communism and to restore democracy. [2] The 3

4 military believed Goulart was heading the country towards socialism; individuals of the military were upset officer s wages were being lowered while minimum wage was increased under Goulart. [5] The military gained values of anti-communism in Brazil s military war colleges, modeled after US war colleges. [5] The US was supportive of the military government and held the view the military government would curb Brazil s apparent descent into Communism under Goulart. [7] 1.2 Military Takeover News of the military dictatorship hit the US. In an article in the New York Times tells, the military regime has installed a censorship of the press, made thousands of arrests and dismissed many Deputies without trial...[brazil] is committed to a real revolution and may therefore have the wisdom to make the social and economic reforms...as a preliminary to the restoration of democracy. [7] The article claimed the Goulart regime was dangerous and cited the government was bolshevizing [Marxistizing] the nation. [7] Proponents of Brazil s military viewed the coup as saving the country from Communism. The were several government raids on suspected Communist groups. One American news report told of the raids in the state of Guanabara were Communist propaganda was seized, more than 3,000 people were arrested, and there was over 900 raids. [8]. Another article told how the government would begin decommunization measures to oust any members of government or military who was a Communist sympathizer. [9] The articles were framed as supportive of the military coup. The government began arresting its enemies and partaking in violence such as torture. [2] Students were targeted and universities were raided. [2] Many union league leaders were jailed; any leftists were singled out for military persecution. [2] The military introduced reforms like National Information Bureau or SNI to collect and analyze data pertaining to national security, counterintelligence, and information on matters of internal subversion. [2] The military broadened the powers of the president citing frames of national security and nationalism. The new military government strengthened executive power and limited the powers of Congress. [2] Upon expanding the power of the president, the new military regime abolished all political parties including the PTB Labor Party. [2] The military undermined the ability of politi- 4

5 cal parties to transform themselves into genuine transmission belts for nonelite interests. [10] The new regime also censored the media such to anger the Brazilian intelligentsia but gained the media support of Globo Network. [11] 1.3 American Public Opinion It is hard to gauge where the American public opinion was at this point. There was some resistance to Brazils military dictatorship in the states from academics, clergy, Brazilian exiles, and political activists, but the majority of the American public was not aware of the alleged human rights abuses of torture. [18] The military regime was largely supported by President Johnson and Congress. [18] Kennedy went as far as to grant aid to training anti-guerilla fighters and start a cultural movement where anticommunist values were emphasized. [19] The media was also largely pro-military regime based on a sample of articles I summarized that showed a largely positive (not negative or neutral) frame while covering Brazils new regime in Birth of a Movement 2.1 Mobilization Movements are a type of contentious collective action made when a network of individuals gather for a common purpose with common interests (common goal) organizes and mobilize to challenge opponents, elites, and authority. Movements are an example of a collective action because behavior outcomes are given in measurements of holistic behavior. Movements are unlike interest groups in that they lack the funding and organization that interest groups have. Mobilization is risky and because these agents lack resources, movements often involve violence or deprivation as a means of communication to the state authorities. The first step in social movement is a shared identity. Individuals in movements share common interests and may result in classist sentiments. Identity is a key factor in how networks form. A network is a social construct involving the communication of individuals drawn together for a common purpose. Once a network is formed, constraints on collective action such as crisis might cause social movements to form out of existing social networks. Social mobilization was very 5

6 strong at this point in the military s new regime. Many students, representatives of and middle class people took part in the demonstrations. [2] There was an increase in the participation of doctors, lawyers, senior civil servants, merchants, and businessmen. [12] Many members of the church openly challenged the military government. [2] According to Freeman s theory of the origins of social movements, there must be four propositions for contention to become a social movement. The first is there must be pre-existing communications networks or infrastructure with the base of the movement. [13] In this case, the networks of people in demonstrations against the new regime were largely institutional; the movement that challenged the regime was made up of networks of all types of groups. College campuses and churches were places where networks could organize, communicate, and mobilize. The movement that challenged the regime was made up of networks of all types of groups. The second proposition is not only the network needs to be able to communicate, but it has to be a place where ideas are exchanged, where people will be receptive of a new message that will cause mobilization. [13] In this case, networks were brought together in universities where ideas are shared, churches where people come together and organize, businesses are where people work and unionize. These close networks would allow people to be exposed to new ideas; Brazil had a prehistory of labor movements and student movements before the new regime. The new regime s measures caused the students, clergy, and workers a place where new ideas of grievances could flourish. Proposition three is besides the networks, there must be shared grievances of the network. [13] Citizens did not approve of the military s overreaching executive powers and felt their civil liberties threatened with the new regime s actions. A social movement was forming against the military regime. Protests were taking place all over Brazil with networks of people outraged at the new regime s measures. Protesting and demonstrations are offensive actions that show one group s interests of social change. [13] The protesters were challenging authority of the new regime and hoped to voice their grievances to the state through demonstrations. The informal channel of demonstrations and protests brought clashes with police, causing more outrage from the violence. The fourth proposition is crisis would cause a network of grieving people to mobilize into action in the form of protest or demonstrations. [13] The crisis need not be that large one, but any 6

7 Figure 1: Protests, Brazil Figure 2: Protests, Brazil event that would call on others to organize into action. In 1968 following a crisis of the death of a student at the hands of the military police, there were massive demonstrations in Brazil; the massive demonstrations were massive protests and the beginnings of contentious collective action against the new Brazilian government. [2] The student s death was a catalyst for summoning waves of mobilization. 2.2 Marxism and the Youth Brazil had a relatively young population; over half of the population was under 20. [2] Marxism was a guiding philosophy for many of Brazil s youth. Marxism provided a way for youth to understand their social reality and as a guide to mobilized action against their grievances. [14] Marxism holds 7

8 people will engage in collective action if their social class is in contrast with the authority. In Brazil s military regime, students were targeted and this could have bound them under one social class against the authoritarian regime. The youth held very Marxist attitudes about the world around them. The youth believed that man was under an exploitative social order that favors some classes over others. The attitude of the youth was that man needed mobilization to liberate man from all chains that socially enslave him, allowing him to fulfill his potentialities; and one the other hand an optimistic attitude concerning the capacity of human communities for self-determination. [14] The Marxist youth used various cultural symbols to mobilize other youth, build networks, and sustaining their movements. Revolt is a Marxist philosophy such that through revolting individuals can create change. The youth believed through protest changes could be made. Mobilization was a form of political bargaining and a way for the youth to express their grievances to the government. Marxist philosophy and its relation to Communism further exacerbated the government s antagonistic behavior towards the youth, and many youth turned to extremism in an effort to rebel against the perceived atrocities of the new military government. 2.3 Workers United Both rural and urban social movements continued during the military dictatorship giving rise to a massive Labor Movement. In rural areas, movements could be divided into three groups: 1) religious and social needs, 2) religions and social justice, and 3) social justice. [2] Many individuals falling under the religious and social need and religious and social justice needs took up arms against the state and formed militia groups. The third group, those seeking only social justice, participated in strikes to increase salaries and seek better working conditions. The increase of urbanization lead to a growing labor movement. Cities caused people to migrate and hundreds of workers were exposed to the same conditions. [2] During this period, urban mobilization proved to be unsuccessful because industry was a small part of Brazil s economy and workers did not have enough bargaining power. [2] While the labor movements were comprised of the networking and shared grievances steps of successful movements, and the worker s mobilized, there was a lack of leadership. The movements 8

9 were isolated in certain areas of Brazil so no unifying message was made to the state. The government also had control over the movements such that state security was not threatened by them. The labor movement needed leadership and the power to bargain with the state. 3 Revolutionary Groups There were violence and clashes with police as the mobilization against the government grew. [2] This further increased the grievances and inspired the networks to keep pursuing the demonstrations. The waves of mobilizations brought much violence from Leftists. Many armed rebel groups were forming; many of the armed rebel groups were former military. [2] These groups were radicalized against the government and chose armed resistance. There may be many reasons for why the rebels took up arms but violence is a form of bargaining. These rebels formed guerilla groups that would partake in violence against the Brazilian government in purpose to overthrow the Brazilian government. Many rebel groups committed violence towards the government in the form of kidnapping, robery, murder, arson, and hijacking. [15] Robbery was a newer form of contentious action not seen in earlier periods of social unrest in Brazils history. Many guerilla group would Rob banks to fund the revolution, as guerilla groups, unlike institutions, lack the financial capital to bargain with the state through formal channels. Kidnapping was a common form of interaction of rebel agents. Many rebel groups partook in kidnapping as a form of contentious political action. For example, one group kidnapped the American Ambassador during this period. [2] Kidnapping is a very violent form of contentious political action and must have been brought about under certain conditions. The rebel groups exposed their enemy (the military government s) weakness (Ambassadors) and sought to take advantage of the military government s vulnerability by kidnapping and violence. In one famous event, the Revolutionary Movement 8th October, a guerilla group made up of former Brazilian Communist Party members kidnapped the American Ambassador, Charles Burke Elbrick in 1969 in Rio de Janeiro. The group is known for its Marxist-Leninist ideology. These communist revolutionaries sought to bargain the life of the Ambassador with the lives of fifteen political prisoners that were imprisoned by the military regime. Elbrick was held for four days. 9

10 Figure 3: Film: Four Days in September (1997). Four Days in September Although this paper is not a work of methodogical individualism, the Brazilian film (1997) depicted actors using a rational choice model such that the decision to release the prisoners or kill the ambassador was reached as an individual choice rather than a collective, structural, holistic outcome variable. 4 Interaction 4.1 Game Theory Using game theory, one might set up a scenario for a rebel group kidnapping the US Ambassador and trading for the lives of prisoners. The group gave the government an ultimatum that if the prisoners were realized, the rebels would release the Ambassador as well. The group had two choices if there demands of the military regime were not met. They could have chosen to release the Ambassador or choose to kill him. The rebels might have killed the Ambassador had the military regime not agreed to their terms. In this regard, the rebel group was successful in its bargaining; the Ambassador was released and so were the fifteen prisoners. The rebels were arrested and tortured by the military regime, but later released when another rebel group kidnapped the German Ambassador. The rebels were then granted asylum but exiled. The bargaining proved to be successful. The rebel group, united with arms under the grievance against the authoritative government, successfully bargained with the government and exchanged the Ambassador for the prisoners. The US pressured the Brazilian government to accede to de- 10

11 Figure 4: Event interaction map mands of the kidnappers. [16] The US pressured the Brazilian local law enforcement for greater protections for its staff. Such tactics proved to be successful in Brazil. Between 1979 and 1980, 129 political prisoners were released in return for kidnapped ambassadors. [16] Graph 2: Event interaction map. The guerilla wave that occurred during the 1970s proved to be successful, not in the organizations initial goals of revolution, but successful in bargaining power and influence to get individuals released from captivity. The guerilla wave was not sustainable as many of those in guerilla group were arrested, killed, or exiled. The guerilla groups could not sustain robbing banks for income resources. The limited power of the guerilla revolutionary group proved to be short lived and unsuccessful at its initial aims however it the agents managed to affect the decisions of the military regime. 4.2 Structural Agents There were many actors or agents that interacted during this period in Brazil. The first actor is the Military Dictatorship, a government entity with the power of law, military strength, and wealth resources in the form of taxation. The Military Dictatorship placed heavy influence on executive powers and through executive powers was able to act in measures such as arresting individuals, restricting rights of individuals, controlling the economy, and settling public contention. The next agent is students. The students organized at Universities as a base of influence, and used these areas to share ideas. The youth were heavily influenced by Marxist ideology and unified under righting the social wrongs that Capitalism brought. Like in Marxist theory, the students felt demonstrations as a form of rebellion. The students have limited resources and did not partake in violence against the government although many students faced arrests. The students were in 11

12 confrontation with the Military Dictatorship as many of the dictatorships arrest and media seizures were on college campuses. The students were able to organize and maintain massive protest demonstrations in an act against the Military government. The next agents are rural and urban workers. Urban and rural workers have a long-standing repertoire of contention such that strikes were a part of rural and urban history in Brazil since the Vargas era. Union leaders sought to organize the rural and urban classes under the banner of workers rights. The workers sought better working conditions and better salaries. Rural and urban workers made up a larger labor movement along with students, and the middle class. Another agent was the middle-class of Brazil. The middle-class was bound by the shared view that the military regime had gone too far in its actions and sought in massive demonstrations to protest and bargain for better rights. The middle-class was made up of professionals such as businessmen, doctors, lawyers, and other urban professionals. The last two agents are the Church and the Media. The Media was both pro-dictatorship and anti-dictatorship. The Church was also a pro-worker voice against the regime. As shown in Graph 1, and from a methodically holistic approach, it can be shown that many structural actors were in opposition to Brazils military dictatorship. First, the guerilla rebels with Marxist-Leninist ideology began using violence because of the lack of resources that an institution would have for example. The next structural agent is the Church in Brazil which was anti-regime and pro-worker. Another causal opposer would be the Labor Movement, which was comprised of students, middle-class, and urban and rural class workers. The Labor Movement was a significant force against the regime by way of protest voting which eventually toppled the regime. Another actor would be the Brazilian Media which was both pro and anti regime. The agents may be split into two camps. In one camp, there exists the military dictatorship, the US government, and the media. This is the anti-marxist camp. One the other side of the isle, another camp which houses the Marxist-influenced Labor movement made up of Marxist student, Communist Union workers, and the sociakist middle class, as well as the pro-worker Church, the Marxist guerilla groups, and the media. The camps are in opposition. To answer the research question about the effect on these agents against each other, it would seem the military dictatorship is structurally outnumbered. 12

13 Figure 5: Interaction among agents during Brazils Military Dictatorship ( ). These actors interacted in many ways, opposing power and influence over the others. The Labor Movement was especially influential in the fall of the military regime. The Labor Movement gave rise to open elections via democratization at the local level through protest voting as a repertoire of contention. The protest vote was a learned behavior in which collective individuals could change the political system using a unit of measurement: power. Power is a behavior that affects another agents behavior. For example, the guerilla movement exercised power over the military dictatorship because the agreement at the end of the interaction was a success for the guerilla groups given they achieved their goals. Power also affected the Labor Movement on the military regime such that power was exercised over the state in the form of voting as a structural, collective behavior. The military regime exerted power using structural mechanisms such as law, arrests, torture, exile, and controlling the press. 5 Socialist Revolution 5.1 Rise of the PT Party Workers movements aligned themselves with union and communist parties, however no state bargaining was made until the rise of the PT Party. The PT, or Partido dos Trabalhadores (Worker s Party), was made up of rural and urban union members, the Catholic Church, and the professional 13

14 middle-class. [2] The PT platform aimed to secure the rights of individuals and socially transform Brazil into a socialist state. [2] In 1983, the labor movement partnered with the PT. [2] The PT movement became the leader of the labor movement, giving the labor movement leadership needed to bargain with the state. The PT party was unique in the fact that it was a labor movement party. [17] The party absorbed the labor movement and used the momentum of the movement to propel the party into power. The PT became a political party of a social movement in purpose to challenge the military authority. The PT party sought power by the form of elections. Social networks were already established for the massive voting to take place. The PT were able to use cultural symbology and make famous the protest vote where mobilization came as a form of voting rather than protesting in massive demonstrations. [17] In 1983, there were massive elections where 84 percent of people came out and voted. [2] This shows the power the social movement had in mobilizing people to vote; Massive protest voting became a form of evolved social action and allowed for a greater outreach of contention. 5.2 Elections As Breneman (1995) writes, In 1984 a nation-wide campaign (diretas ja ) was led to reintroduce direct election for the president and other officials, and national support for the opposition parties heightened. In 1985 the military installed a civilian president, Jose Sarney, and in 1989 the country finally held direct elections for the office of the president, electing Fernando Collor de Mello. [20] As Figure 4.1 shows, Parliamentary elections in Brazil were held with two opposing parties, the military s National Renewel Alliance and the Democratic Movement Party. The military s party was in power until the election of 1986 where the Democratic Movement Party won 47.8 percent of the vote runnning against various other parties such as the Democratic Labour Party, the Brazilian Labour Party, the Worker s Party, the Liberal Front, and the Democratic Social Party. Table 4.1 shows the fall of the Military Party and the rise of the Democratic Movement and Worker s Party. The Democratic Movement won the vote in the 1986 elections and the military party did not run that year. Democratic elections were held and Brazil s military leaders were disposed, therefore ending 14

15 Brazil Legislative Elections National Renewel Alliance Democratic Movement Party Year Figure 6: Percentage of Votes in Brazil s Parliamentary Elections Table 1: Brazil Parliamentary Elections as Percentage Year Military Democratic Movement Worker s Party

16 Figure 7: Relationship between Fall of Dictatorship and Election Outcome the military dictatorship. Through democratically held elections, leaders were chosen and democracy was therefore restored. Brazil had transferred itself from an authoritarian regime to a democratic regime. Authoritarianism and democracy are on opposite sides of the spectrum and this was sudden change for Brazil. Power voting was an new form of behavior adding to the repertoire of contentious activity in Brazil. Elections proved to the the leading cause of the fall of the military dictatorship. One can approach this relationship as aggregate choice for leader (voter decision) as the independent variable and the fall of the military dictatorship as the dependent variable. Modeling this relationship, one can conclude many factors might have increased the outcome of the elections. One example would be the power voting behavior as well as Brazil s rising movements. A model for this relationship may be found in Figure Fall of Military Dictatorship Given the fall of the military dictatorship was the direct result of outcomes, it is safe to assume causality such that the military dictatorship fell because the result of the elections. This is an interesting and albeit obvious causal relationship but what factors drove individuals to turn out in massive turnouts and therefore turn the election on the side of democracy opposed to authoritarian- 16

17 ism? The answer may lie in collective behavior such that structural factors caused an aggregate individual outcome to vote for Fernando Collor de Mello. One may lie in the great wave of Labor Movements (students, workers, and middle-class) that arose since the Vargas era. The wave gained momentum during the military dictatorship as the values of the two agents collided such that are on opposing sides and fighting against each other. Voting in massive turnouts caused the election to sway in a public opinion favor such that a socialist democratic candidate would be elected thus ending the military dictatorship. The rise of the protest vote as contentious political action is a factor to be investigated. The protest vote was added to Brazil s public repertoire of contention and it proved to be very effective against the regime. The process of democratization in Brazil was a slow one. Over time, the labor movement in combination from pressures from the media, the church, and revolutionary groups lead the public to turn more and more out to vote and show support of the greater movement at large. This collective behavior resultantly ended the military regime in Brazil. Over the course of the 1970s and 1980s, Brazil was having greater turnout in its federal and local elections resulting in an aggregate democratic behavior. 6 Conclusion The Goulart era was an era of growing contention such that the military was antagonistic towards the regime and social mobilizations were on the rise. Brazil has a rich tradition of protesting, strikes, and demonstrations and later added guerilla violence and protest vote to its repertoire of contention. Brazils Marxist movement was started as separate movements from the middle-class, students, urban and rural workers movements as well as actions from guerilla groups, the Church, the media, and American governmental influence. The PT Party later came into the picture and lead the movement of protest voting which became a new form of contention to add to the Marxist revolutions repertoire of contention. Over time, Brazil began democratizing as voting increased for socialist candidates at the local and federal levels. Eventually the military regime yielded in 1985 and installed a civilian leader; elections held in 1989 were Brazils first. 17

18 Many factors influence why movements start out as groups of individuals and over time grow to be collective movements where individuals are mobilized into action. In Brazil, mobilization against the military dictatorship started when networks of workers whom formerly lead strikes unionized and bargained with the government started a wave of mobilization in the form of massive demonstrations. The demonstrations were made up mostly of urban professionals and middle-class individuals. Other urban actors were working class people left over from the Labor Party of Brazil. When the military seized the rights of people and ousted Communist officials, it created a great crisis. Students mobilized, and a crisis happened when a student was killed. This exacerbated the demonstrations. There were clashes with police resulting in violence. The culture was heavily anti-government, and mobilizations were a force to bargain and push back against the military government. Actors and groups may have an effect in challenging authority despite the size of the agent. Smaller actors have proven to have an effect on the actions of opponents, elites, and authority. Individuals later formed guerilla revolutionary groups to take up arms and partake in deprivation and violence against the military authorities and elites and opponents of Communism. Many would rob banks and partake in crime to fund their revolutionary aims. The interest was overthrowing the military regime. The Marxist revolutionaries kidnapped foreign diplomats in purpose to bargain with the military regime. There was violence on both sides; many who were arrested by the military regime were tortured and the government received a reputation for being cruel. This further increased outrage and lead to further public contention for the military regime. The military regime met public demand and gave up power of the regime. Graph 2: Marxist Revolution crossing Military Threshold over time The revolution began to exercise power with the rise of the PT Partys protest vote. Protest voting became a new form of contention to add to the Marxist movements repertoire, a powerful one, where leaders were ousted and the military regime failed leadership at the local level. The Marxist movement didnt end but became institutionalized with the vote. Marxist revolutionary elites took power in place of the falling military government. The Marxist movement phenomena roughly evolved from a social movement into a form of government that would lead the regime. 18

19 Figure 8: Marxist Revolution crossing Military Threshold over time As shown on Figure 5.1, over time, the Marxist Revolution broke through the Military Regimes authoritarian threshold and was able to achieve the status of socialist democracy through protest voting. In this regard, the Marxist/Socialist revolution was indeed a revolution beginning that the regime changed from an authoritarian regime to a democracy. The revolution was a peaceful one, using the power of the vote instead of the power of arms. In conclusion, the Marxist revolution social movement was a success and the hypothesis that the Marxist social movement brought about the fall of the regime is a correct assumption to make. Bibliography [1] R. M. Levine, Father of The Poor, Cambridge University Press, [2] B. Fausto, A Concise History of Brazil, Cambridge University Press, [3] T. E. of Encyclopdia Britannica, Joao goulart, com/biography/joao- Goulart, [Online; accessed 20-January-2016] (2008). [4] H. of Everything, Government joao goulart, historiadetudo.com/governo-joaogoulart, [Online; accessed 21-January-2016] (2015). 19

20 [5] T. E. Skidmore, The politics of military rule in Brazil, , Oxford University Press., [6] BBC, Brazilian ex-president joao goulart not poisoned, bbc.com/news/worldlatin-america , [Online; accessed 21- January-2016] (2014). [7] N. Y. Times, Brazil s new regime, ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times, [Online; accessed 20-January-2016] (1964). [8] E. C. Burks, Arrests in brazil placed at 7,000, ProQuest Historical News- papers: The New York Times, [Online; accessed 20-January-2016] (1964). [9] E. C. Burks, Anti-red law asked by military in brazil, ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times, [Online; accessed 20-January-2016] (1964). [10] F. Hagopian, Democracy by undemocratic means? elites, political pacts, and regime transition in brazil., in: Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 23.2, 1990, pp [11] N. Ribke, Telenovela writers under the military regime in brazil: Beyond the cooption and resistance dichotomy, in: Media, Culture, and Society, Vol. 33(5), 1970, pp [12] T. E. Skidmore, Failure in brazil: From popular front to armed revolt, in: Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 5,3, 1970, p [13] J. Freeman, On the origins of social movements., in: Waves of protest: Social movements since the sixties, Vol. 101, 7. [14] C. Furtado, Brazil: What kind of revolution?, in: Foreign A airs, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1963, pp [15] J. Means, Latin american report: Political kidnappings and terrorism, in: The North American Review, Vol. 255, No. 4, 1970, pp [16] J. C. Barker, The protection of diplomatic personnel, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., [17] M. E. Keck, The workers party and democratization in brazil., in: Hispanic American Historical Review, Vol. 73(2), 1993, pp [18] Green, James. We cannot remain silent: opposition to the Brazilian military dictatorship in the United States. Duke University Press, [19] Leacock, Ruth. Requiem for revolution: the United States and Brazil, Kent State University Press,

21 [20] Breneman, Tracy Ann. Brazil s Authoritarian Experience: ; A study of conflict. Conflict Research Consortium. Working paper,