Author: Pedro Doria

Source: O Estado de S. Paulo, 13/07/2008

Daniel Dantas' story is confused with that of Brazil in the last 15 years. A beloved student of economist Mário Henrique Simonsen, he was considered for the Ministry of Finance in the Fernando Collor government and had a prominent role in the sale of state-owned companies. It is also a story set in the private sector, always sinuously intertwined with politics and government. First, by the hands of Antonio Carlos Magalhães, countryman and political protector. Then, during the Fernando Henrique Cardoso administration, in close relations with economists linked to the Real Plan, such as Pérsio Arida and Elena Landau. Now, in the Lula government, with PT members like Luiz Eduardo Greenhalgh and José Dirceu.

Dantas dominated headlines and shareholder conflicts, cultivated powerful enemies in the private sector and in the Plateau. Arrested by the Federal Police, he provoked a fight never seen before, with federal prosecutors and judges standing up against the Federal Supreme Court. It is a story that insinuates deep veins of corruption in the bowels of the state. “Brazil is essentially corrupt and we need to face it”, says political scientist Bolívar Lamounier, author, with other scholars, of the Culture of Transgressions in Brazil1 (Ed. Saraiva). “We have been experiencing the illusion that, with economic growth and educational improvement, everything will improve. The country is richer and, apparently, more corrupt. There are advances. The Public Ministry, the Federal Police, the Justice itself. But, in the teacher's assessment, we have a worse policy.

OESP: Daniel Dantas has demonstrated the ability to create a web of support in all governments. What does this say about Brazil?

Bolivar Lamounier: It is called political capitalism. He increases his fortune through political contacts and receiving privileged information. Brazil has a patrimonialist formation, that is, the State is the true holder of wealth. Its power is overwhelming. The legal tangle is such that it has become impossible to keep a company in order. Hence the government's pressure capacity to be devastating. The influence of the State in sectors of an oligopolistic nature such as telecommunications, energy or aviation is even greater. In this way, a guy who has technical skills and audacity, like Daniel Dantas, needs political contacts to support himself in business. It is evident that his case, which is said to have resorted to espionage companies, is extreme. But every great Brazilian entrepreneur needs a symbiotic relationship with the government. Because the government's hand is present in everything.

OESP: Is this the origin of corruption in Brazil?

Bolivar Lamounier: The problem of corruption is much deeper. Today we are too intellectually unarmed to understand its origins. What we have left are two consensuses. The first is that corruption is widespread in society and we all disagree with everyone's behavior. The second is that impunity is widespread. There is a total inability to enforce the laws. If we were to punish, according to the law, all the corruption that exists in the country would have to put half of the population in jail. What is happening now is an attempt to get out of this impunity syndrome. That is why a federal judge orders to arrest, in the Supreme Court they order to release, the judge asks for arrest again. But then there may be an excess of the federal judge, an arbitrariness, creating a climate of legal uncertainty.

 
OESP: Why don't we stop corruption?

Bolivar Lamounier: Because we see it from an optimistic perspective. We attribute everything to the past: colonization, the Portuguese, the formation of the country. It is an evolutionary analysis. We have the impression that we are moving towards something better. What would hinder the shackles of the past. This is not necessarily true. This reading hides another premise, the concept of the good savage by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The man is good, but society corrupts him. In Brazil, the elite is bad, but the people are essentially good. This impression is profoundly superficial. Brazil is essentially corrupt. The truth is this: nothing indicates that we are on the way to a better world. Corruption and clientelism are showing no signs of abating.

 
I think they are increasing. When the government says that we have more information about corruption and just for that reason it appears more, it sounds as valid a statement as any other. It could only accept it if the government had a list of all the corrupt and how much they have deviated over time. In Brazil, transgression is widespread and always occurs for economic reasons. There are passionate cases, but these exist in any society and are the exception. Fraud, assault, corruption, Brazilian crime has economic causes.

OESP: What are the causes of Brazilian corruption?

Bolivar Lamounier: There are three. The first is economic growth. Back in the 50s, developmentalists, we believed that enriching the country would lead to a better educated population, and ultimately we would have an impersonal state in which everyone who broke the law would be punished. Brazil got rich and none of that happened. Whenever there is a time of economic growth and modernization, new opportunities for corruption arise. It is so everywhere, not just in poor nations. In France or the USA, too. It is when the collusion of groups appears to defraud bids promoted by the State, for example. Because they are obvious opportunities, involving large amounts. Even in the most liberal nations, when the economy grows, the state contracts many services involving high values. When a country undergoes a major economic transformation, as is the case with us, the trend increases. In the case of privatizations, for example, large sums passed from one hand to the other and corruption was inevitable, no matter how much control there was. In Russia it was much worse. Japan still has monster corruption to this day. South Korea, too. They are governments that concentrate a lot of power. How long has China become capitalist? Twenty years. And it already boasts a large number of billionaires. Even considering the pace of Chinese growth, how did this wealth come? Not on merit.

OESP: And the second cause?

Bolivar Lamounier: Social mobility. Our country has 200 million people, half of them very needy, the other half eager to improve their lives. There is a lot of social mobility. Whoever says that, in Brazil, the poor are born and die poor is in the world of the moon. Any small movement in the economy causes immediate changes, every opportunity here is taken advantage of, as the market is immense and has enormous needs. In the last few months, for example, when car credit extended, everyone bought immediately without worrying about how many installments they would pay or bad traffic. Automobile makes life easier and is a status symbol. The Brazilian has an incredible desire to improve his life, to have a better situation than his father had. Combine the two issues, opportunities for corruption and the desire to improve life, and join this to the third cause: Brazilian standards are loose.

OESP: Is it our Portuguese heritage?

Bolivar Lamounier: Moral norms in Brazil have always been very weak. Compared to Europe, we had, for example, a very weak Church. Law, until very recently, did not reach much of the country. Social norms are weak and the State is unable to apply them. The origin of this is the less. Our problem is not the past, it is the present. Let's go back to Rousseau. A few decades ago, the Church in Brazil was weak, but very reactionary. He defended property, the latifundio. Today, the Church is different, believes in Rousseau. This view that the people are essentially good, but corrupted by the environment, has spread to all sectors of society. It is a mindset that prevents law enforcement. Only the defense of altruism is legitimate. A group that defends its interests is considered immoral. The word "interest" sounds dirty, suggests a calculating individual. We believe in Santa Claus. We believe that people are good on principle. In the USA, their head is not Rousseau. It's Thomas Hobbes. For them, people are bad. You have to watch the behavior all the time. It is necessary to comply with the law, because if it does not, the transgression will be widespread. Police don't have to think that people are good or bad. You have to look at transgression. Policy has to deal with the likelihood that certain behaviors will occur and be prevented. We think that everything that went wrong in Brazil has a social origin somewhere in the latifundium, in the patriarchal family or whatever. It is naivete. We are a society of 200 million people, completely urban and poor. It is a different country.

OESP: Gilberto Freyre is obsolete?

Bolivar Lamounier: Completely. In his time, it was believed that the generation of wealth led to a more perfect world. Twenty years ago, there was a discussion between the left and malfeasance in São Paulo, whether the police should act preventively or repressively. What is this discussion? The police have to act, that's all. We had to be much more prepared in legal and police terms to act when there is a transgression. Cultural values ​​or the propensity for certain behaviors are not fought. You fight serious infractions of the legal norm. We do not understand the seriousness of the situation that Brazil faces. The level of corruption can increase. See the parallel example, urban violence. Many theorists speak as if it were a momentary thing that will disappear later on. But how will it disappear? The country is urban, has immense peripheries, drug trafficking acts on a large scale, there is no measure to combat the drug market, which is the consumer, or the entry of drugs, at the borders. Violence will not disappear spontaneously. Brazil does not face transgression.

OESP: Rich didn't go to jail before.

Bolivar Lamounier: It is true. Before, there was a very big class difference. You arrested the poor, but not the rich. I am not denying that the Federal Police is more efficient. The change begins with the 1988 Constitution. Before it, prosecutors were subordinate to judges. It gave autonomy to the Public Ministry and a new generation of prosecutors came with a desire to investigate. This in turn caused many judges to move as well. The end of the dictatorship sparked a debate within the Federal Police. They were used to acting under generals, what would democracy mean to them? It took a decade to find a course. Helped by the Public Ministry, which began investigating problems in all areas, she found her calling. That is not all that has changed. Inflation erodes society, forces everyone to criminal behavior. In the early 90's, nobody bought a property in São Paulo without a suitcase full of dollars. This created a black exchange and an illicit market in which everyone participated. There is no more inflation. The leg that did not walk in this process was that of the CPI. She ends up becoming so politicized that she is innocuous most of the time. The case of the monthly allowance is an exception. It took 40 names to the Supreme.

OESP: What is the problem with the Congress?

Bolivar Lamounier: Câmara and Senado are in a mediocrity like never before. We are experiencing an off-season of political leaders. At the time of the Constituent Assembly, you, without difficulty, put down 20 names of immense importance on the national political scene. Today I can not. There is no incentive to be political. They will call you a thief, your family will be upset. The person who has a good education will earn triple in another profession and have a weekend. When the politician's credit drops to almost zero, a vicious circle is born. You either attract corrupt people or unprepared people. The Executive has no project. And the parties have no project. The result is that, having nothing to do, deputies and senators go to the investigation. The Executive reacts with political agreements. Politics in Brazil comes down to that. Only.

OESP: Before the dictatorship, parties like UDN and PTB did in fact represent sectors of society. Don't you think that this has stopped happening today?

Bolivar Lamounier: The UDN was the party of the urban middle class, those people who made a hard living and did not expect a generous retirement. There is still this urban middle class, much larger today. It is a contingent of people who pay the service twice: the tax for education and education in private schools. It was a liberal party. The DEM today is not a liberal party. That's why he changed his name. A liberal party in Brazil would have to come from São Paulo or the big capitals. It's not the case. The PSDB. Which is? It is the party of the reform made in the Fernando Henrique government. But he didn't discover his own agenda after that. And the PT? Some say it is representative. I don't know what. What is the economic doctrine of the PT? We saw that it didn't. The party came to power and disdained everything. I had no project. And he distrusts capitalism. He has a nationalist mind from the 50s, with prejudice against the private sector. It is not for nothing that Dr. Dilma is the strong arm of the government. The parties in Brazil were dissolved in 30, 37 and 64. The military believed that the origins of corruption were in them. They dissolved and tried to impose a bipartisan system like the British. When democracy returned, the country was completely different and the parties from before did not want to say anything else. It was a vacuum. In 1989, when we had the first presidential election, there were 22 candidates. There were 21 opposition parties. And none of the big parties did well. It is a sign that they no longer represented the wishes of the population.

OESP: What is the dictatorship's responsibility for the current corruption?

Bolivar Lamounier: When the military introduced the regime, they said “we are going to fight corruption”. In addition to meddling in the party system that had its value, they created a government ten times more concentrated. In a hurry to develop the country, they contracted pharaonic public works. They transformed the country supported by a growth of 8% to 10% per year. I can well imagine how much overbilling there was in those 21 years.

1 Publication organized by the Brazilian Institute of Ethics in Competition (ETCO) and by the Fernando Henrique Cardoso Institute (iFHC) [site note].