O Brasil pós-real e o trilema de Florestan: afinal, para onde mesmo que estamos indo?

Abstract

The analysis of the current economic situation in Brazil has provided optimistic demonstration about the national development policy. In the opinion of a significant number of economists, Brazil has rarely been better, attracting foreign investment and putting the country on a level of unprecedented international credibility. This article’s aim is to problematize the trust given to the current Brazilian model of economic development. We question the claim that the ongoing economic policy is capable of leading the country to the select group of developed capitalist nations.To reflect on the pattern of Brazilian development we delve into the trilemma proposed by Florestan Fernandes in The Bourgeois Revolution in Brazil, according to which the country saw itself in the mid-70’s at a crossroads capable of leading it both to subcapitalism and to advanced capitalism or socialism. Our point of view is that, three decades after Florestan’s assertion, the trilemma pointed out by the author is still unresolved. After all, the country neither had a transition to advanced capitalism or socialism, nor did it present a dynamic pattern which would allows us to reach the conclusion that the dependent and “sub-capitalist” insertion has been consolidated. On the other hand, there can be no doubt as to the consistency of Florestan’s projections on the socioeconomic crisis derived from the exhaustion of the excluding pattern of growth associated with the “Miracle”. In our opinion, this contradiction is resolved if we understand that the crisis of the 80’s culminated in the re-articulation of the political and economical bourgeois project, a re-articulation that culminated in the “Real Plan” and articulates the control of inflation with the fictitious valorization of national and international capital, with the structural overvaluation of national currency and relative depression of internal growth and employment rates. The result is that, as in the 70’s, the national heteronomy is preserved, which limits the generalization of citizenship and the endogenous growth of the country. The conclusion we reach is that, in spite of the real socioeconomic advances made, the impasses, challenges and political possibilities that lie ahead are still essentially the same as those announced by Florestan over thirty years ago. Key words: dependency; national bourgeoisie; Real Plan; competition and inter-capitalist conflicts. Artigo recebido em 17 out. 2011.