Nuno Alvares

Representative Government and Chronic Ignorance

– Folha de S. Paulo, November 23, 1987

by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

Today, I address a matter of great importance in our troubled national situation, but not in my capacity as President of the National Council of the TFP. I do so simply as an observer of events unfolding before everyone’s eyes. If I mention a current initiative of the TFP to illustrate my point, it is only because it provides a striking example and a useful analytical tool.

I aim to underscore the gap between the truly historic importance of several issues raised during the debates of the Constituent Assembly and the role culture has played in shaping those debates.

One could argue that the more significant a subject is, the more eager our constituents — and the political, social, and economic sectors interested in it — should be to listen to the experts (of whom we have long had a substantial number, endowed with unquestionable competence) whose contributions would elevate the preparatory studies and the debates themselves to the level our country deserves.

By “listening to them,” I do not mean just collecting, from time to time, a brief statement for the media, but rather giving them ample opportunity to present — before audiences sometimes more, sometimes less educated, yet always significant in quality or size — the observations, reflections, and arguments that come from the culture and erudition they have gained.

Someone might argue that this is impossible in the fast-paced world of today, which is supposedly too quick for serious intellectual discussion — whether spoken or written — that requires from the “man on the street” an attention and time he no longer has.

However, this objection does not hold water. When things are arranged in their natural order, the substance of intellectual works spreads on its own among the masses, through a process similar to a stream that, springing crystal-clear from a mountain peak, descends in successive cascades until it finally irrigates the surrounding plain.

High-caliber intellectual works must first reach the most cultivated sectors, and from there, through talented and serious disseminators, they pass to audiences of progressively lower cultural capacity, until they ultimately reach the masses, for each disseminator is, in their own way, a condenser.

And, naturally, each level of condensers adapts the scholarly material to the harsh conditions of contemporary haste and bustle.

Through this public relations effort — in the best sense of the term — and with the valuable cooperation of the media, it becomes possible to cultivate a thoughtful and informed public opinion, capable of providing the essential cooperation needed to keep the representative system coherent and credible.

Now that a representative democratic system is established in our country, I cannot understand how anyone could passively accept the publics disconnect from the major and serious issues on which the system relies for the expression of its sovereign will through the Constituent Assembly.

In a democracy, where the decisive power of the vote belongs to the general public, accepting with indifference that the people lack the time to dedicate even minimal attention, reflection, and analysis to the important questions of the common good is equivalent to asserting that incompetence rules the nation.

In other words, it becomes normal to rush headlong toward disaster amid uproar, chaotic and meaningless conflicts, and vulgar competition of interests.

Well, this is exactly what’s happening to us…

Naturally, faced with this situation, media executives are often forced by circumstances to settle for inadequate solutions to fill television schedules and newspaper columns with material on “public affairs.” Occasionally, they publish a study of genuine value. The rest is filled in as best they can with narratives or analyses of secondary aspects of current events.

For example, when reporting on a session of the Constitutional Convention Committee — tasked with presenting a proposal on a matter of great importance — many reporters leave the substance of the issue in the shadows, while giving full prominence to the amusing episode of a microphone snatched by Representative “A,” or the tirade that Senator “B” unleashed against “C.”

Many believe that using the unexpected, the unusual, and the vulgar is the only way to garner widespread attention. Therefore, radio and TV shows, along with newspaper columns, often overflow with material unworthy of any moral or intellectual standard — content where weak insults and retorts are mistaken for arguments, insults and slander are used as legitimate combat tools, and pornography becomes the main lure.

All this being said, it is inevitable that controversy ceases to be a noble and disinterested sparring of arguments and turns into a vulgar “rugby” game of defamation, losing both seriousness and skill under the influence of that peculiar itch caused by gossip.

And this brings us to the case of the TFP.

Over its twenty-seven long and challenging years, it has published thirty-five works, either written by members of the organization or by figures openly supportive of it.

More than one of these works became a true bestseller, with impressive print runs. In these publications, the TFP’s ideology is presented in a calm, well-documented, and genuinely serious manner. The public takes in this promotional material — which many might find completely unpopular — with clear sympathy and interest.

Over these twenty-seven years of struggle, the TFP has also been the focus of intense debate. This has made it one of the most well-known organizations in Brazil, with an influence that has expanded significantly abroad. As a result, fourteen autonomous sister organizations have formed across three continents, with others currently in the process of being established.

Were there any significant counterarguments capable of refuting these works? The very question provokes a smile. For something to be significant, it must first exist — and, generally speaking, no such counterarguments were ever presented.

Take, for example, Agrarian Reform — A Question of Conscience, one of our oldest books, published in 1960. It is often acknowledged as having exerted such influence on public opinion that it contributed notably to shaping the ideological climate that led to the ouster of President João Goulart.

However, what meaningful refutation did it generate? None.

Over the course of those twenty-seven years, at least fourteen vicious smear campaigns were launched against the TFP.

My Public Life - A Compilation of Autobiographic

All of them relied on hearsay, defamatory fabrications, and similar tricks. In 1975, for example, it was claimed that the TFP endangered institutional stability by teaching karate to its members. And so it went.

We therefore arrive at the Constituent Assembly, the TFP’s role during it, and related matters. However, I have already gone too far in this introduction to the topic I mentioned at the beginning. I will therefore stop here, hoping that in a future article — getting straight to the core of the matter — I can explain it fully.
____________________________________________________________________
This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic

Index of English posts - Plinio Correa de Oliveira
1371
P. O'B

A sermon in Chicago, summer of 1975, St. Mary's Byzantine Catholic Church, Fr. John Kurty, in a church that had no air conditioning: "Just be attentive and sing the liturgy, and you'll forget the heat. And now that I've told you how to beat the heat up here, I'll teach you how to beat the heat down there." He was a believer -- imagine, preaching about Hell.