No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
"Enfrentar vírus como homem": Bolsonaro's Populism and Performing Hegemonic Masculinity during the COVID-19 pandemic
Abstract
Even among the various Latin American leaders associated with populism, Jair Bolsonaro stands out as one of the most abrasive and extreme examples of the phenomenon. Adopting an interdisciplinary perspective that conceptualises populism as a performed political style, this paper will engage with the specific practices and performances deployed by Bolsonaro, focusing more specifically on those related to the COVID-19 health crisis. In examining these performances, a central point is Bolsonaro's reliance on a binary heteronormativity and gendered ethos which was further exacerbated by the urgency of the global pandemic. This paper will explore how, through his calls for the Brazilian people to "enfrentar vírus como homem e não como moleque", Bolsonaro mobilises hegemonic masculinity to infantilise those who fall sick while undermining criticisms to his problematic management of the pandemic. In this paper, we will develop a holistic analysis of several of Bolsonaro's performances after the beginning of the COVID-19 health crisis in Brazil to assess the way he articulates his identity in relationship with the people. We argue that performances of identity in the populist style are based on the projection of strength and health, which are associated in a conservative ideology with performing hegemonic masculinity and heteronormativity. Conversely, we demonstrate that associating femininity and queerness with weakness serves as the flip side of these gendered performances of identity. Lastly, by situating Bolsonaro's own brand of populism in a history of uneven and unequal developments across gender, race and class in a vast and complex country such as Brazil, the concluding aim of this paper is to consider crisis-making practices in populist politics in the context of a global health crisis that Bolsonaro was ideologically ill-equipped to tackle.
The contribution starts from the observation that several male populist leaders prominently endorse torture as a political means. While political sociology has mostly, and fruitfully, concentrated on analyzing strategies and mechanisms of legitimizing violence (and, more generally, domination), and of hiding rather than showing off illegitimate violence, I will focus on the political benefits of politicians publicly associating themselves with torture – which is in most contexts an epitome of illegitimate violence. Drawing from empirical examples, I argue that there can be a specific payoff for a politician to avow himself to torture precisely because it is a largely delegitimated as well as illegal form of violence. The readiness to do ‘whatever it takes’ regardless of the limits of legitimacy pairs up with the capacity of violence that is commonly associated with masculinity, feeding into a heroized political fighter figure. At the same time, the open disregard for established rules – framed as being developed and monitored by mainstream international ‘elites’ – caters for a populist anti-establishment stance, which can be further supported by the coarse language these politicians use for endorsing torture. Thus, publicly embracing torture may cater both for a populist stance and for political masculinity and thus form an ingredient of ‘populist masculinity.’
The close empirical connections between populism and nationalism have naturalised a rather misleading overlap between the concepts of populism and nationalism in academic and public debates. As a result, the relation between the two has not received much systematic attention. Drawing on the poststructuralist discourse theory originally formulated by Laclau and Mouffe, this article differentially identifies populism and nationalism as distinct ways of discursively constructing and claiming to represent “the people”, as underdog and as nation respectively. These distinct constructions of “the people” can also be identified and highlighted from a spatial or orientational perspective, by looking at the architectonics of populism and nationalism as revolving around a down/up (vertical) and an in/out (horizontal) axis respectively. Building on this framework, the article then concludes that the co-occurrence of populism and nationalism should be studied through the prism of articulation. Again, a focus on discursive architectonics allows grasping how different political projects construct different discourses by connecting the building blocks of populism and nationalism in particular ways. The study of these articulations, based on a clear distinction between populism and nationalism, is a necessary step in further deepening our understanding of the complexity and variety of populist politics.
This article analyses the articulation of populism and nationalism in Peronism and Chavism. Despite their inclusionary policies, their redistribution of wealth and the expansion of social and political rights, Perón and Chávez built authoritarian governments. These national populist leaders concentrated power in the executive, used laws instrumentally to repress dissent and made use of the state apparatus to colonise the public sphere and civil society. Their autocratic drift is explained by a combination of four factors. First, the logic of populism transformed democratic rivals into enemies. Second, these leaders constructed the people as one, and once in power enacted policies to transform diverse and pluralistic populations into homogeneous peoples embodied in their leaderships. Third, even though these former military officers promoted national sovereignty, they acted as the only interpreters of national interests, excluding rivals from the national community. Fourth, Perón and Chávez closed institutional spaces to process dissent and conflict, exacerbating the autocratic impulses of their opponents who used any means necessary, including military coups, to try to get rid of populist presidents.
O conceito de masculinidade hegemônica tem influenciado os estudos de gênero em vários campos acadêmicos, mas ao mesmo tempo tem atraído um sério criticismo. Os autores traçam a origem do conceito a uma convergência de ideias no início dos anos 1980 e mapeiam as formas através das quais o conceito foi aplicado quando os estudos sobre homens e masculinidades se expandiram. Avaliando as principais críticas, os autores defendem o conceito de masculinidade como fundamental, uma vez que, na maioria das pesquisas que o opera, seu uso não é reificador nem essencialista. Entretanto, as críticas aos modelos assentados em características de gênero e às tipologias rígidas são sólidas. O tratamento do sujeito em pesquisas sobre masculinidades hegemônicas pode ser melhorado com a ajuda dos recentes modelos psicológicos, mesmo que os limites à flexibilidade discursiva devam ser reconhecidos. O conceito de masculinidade hegemônica não equivale a um modelo de reprodução social; precisam ser reconhecidas as lutas sociais nas quais masculinidades subordinadas influenciam formas dominantes. Por fim, os autores revisam o que foi confirmado por formulações iniciais (a ideia de masculinidades múltiplas, o conceito de hegemonia e a ênfase na transformação) e o que precisa ser descartado (tratamento unidimensional da hierarquia e concepções de características de gênero). Os autores sugerem a reformulação do conceito em quatro áreas: um modelo mais complexo da hierarquia de gênero, enfatizando a agência das mulheres; o reconhecimento explícito da geografia das masculinidades, enfatizando a interseccionalidade entre os níveis local, regional e global; um tratamento mais específico da encorporação1 em contextos de privilégio e poder; e uma maior ênfase na dinâmica da masculinidade hegemônica, reconhecendo as contradições internas e as possibilidades de movimento em direção à democracia de gênero.
This study analyzes the visual self-representation of current Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is considered to be one of the exponents of the recent rise of rightwing neopopulism. Despite the growing body of literature analyzing contemporary populism, little has been said about the deployment of images in the construction of public meanings relevant to popular understandings of populist leaders. This research draws from the social media analysis of Casullo to investigate how the images posted on Bolsonaro’s Instagram account show him (1) as a mirror of the people, (2) someone extraordinary, and (3) quick to appropriate symbols of power. Referencing the work of Butler, we document how the visual self-representation of Bolsonaro is marked by eccentricity and unsophistication, which makes his demeanor, body, and appropriation of institutional power function as a series of parodies. His performance hyperbolizes the transgressive aspect of populism, producing a vertiginous and pleasurable ambiguity toward the figure of the leader. In emptying the presidency from its extraordinary dimension, the parody paradoxically does something extraordinary by reestablishing the distance that it seeks to eliminate. His eccentric rejection of basic social standards, over-the-top masculinity, and impromptu use of everyday objects as props work to construct an image that he is just an ordinary man, extraordinarily occupying the presidency.
Modern Brazil: A Very Short Introduction provides an account of modern Brazil, covering some of the major features of the country’s transformation. Brazil is alternately praised as a rising power or written off as a country forever failing to reach its potential. This VSI discusses the rise of the modern state in the mid-20th century, and the domestic economic, political, and social challenges faced by the country today. Highlighting some of the peculiar features of Brazil’s development, it also examines how its political leaders engage in informal political deals. Moreover, it looks at the state’s welfare institutions and Brazil’s long history of peaceful relations with neighbours.
Historically, the myth has grown up of Brazil as a racial democracy, despite its marginalisation of its substantial Black population, and the writing out of the Black presence from the national narrative. This article seeks to analyse the extremist political position of Jair Bolsonaro in relation to the Black population of Brazil, within the context of the historical trajectory of official discourses surrounding the question of race. The current far-right president has made racist statements throughout his political career, during his campaign and as president. These are framed here within a broader perspective, relating their content to other views of the state, its agents and its ideologues concerning the Black presence in Brazil since the nineteenth century, at the time of the Brazilian Empire and the struggles by Black organisations to assert their place in the nation.
The present article develops a theory of “nationalist populism” by examining the relationship between populism and the hegemonic configuration of nation-states. Following recent contributions by the “Essex School,” populism is understood as a process whereby diverse political demands and identities come to be aggregated via signifiers, typically that of “the people,” that incarnate an antagonistic populist body. I argue that the rhetorical construction of “the people,” to the extent that it is executed in the context of national hegemonic blocs, will often (inadvertently) come to be overdetermined by uncontested nationalist narratives and life modalities that are symbolically associated with the hegemonic signifier “the nation.” Nationalist populism can therefore best be understood as a chimeric political logic, whereby a populist totality is parasitically signified vis-à-vis the hegemonic signifier “the nation” and its associated family resemblances. This logic can assume a variety of forms, its content being dependent upon contextual political and ideological considerations.
This article begins by considering the diverse ways in which Gilberto Freyre used his key concept of mesticagem and the different cultural fields to which he extended it — architecture, cuisine, sport, literature, urban studies, sociology and even sex. Noting the alternative concepts or metaphors in Freyre’s work — interpenetration, mixture, hybridity and so on — it goes on to discuss a metaphor that he did not use, although it has become popular since his time, ‘cultural translation’. A brief history of the idea of cultural translation and a consideration of its strengths and weaknesses leads to a casestudy of both the literal and the metaphorical translation of the western concept of liberty to Japan after the imperial restoration of 1868.
Este artigo se inicia refletindo sobre as várias maneiras que Gilberto Freyre usou o conceito-chave de mestiçagem e os campos culturais diferentes aos quais ele estendeu o seu uso — arquitetura, culinária, esporte, literatura, urbanismo, sociologia e até mesmo sexo. Chamando a atenção para os conceitos ou metáforas alternativas que se encontram na obra de Freyre — interpenetração, mistura, hibridismo, etc. — o artigo se volta para a discussão de uma metáfora que Freyre não usou, apesar de ter se tornado usual desde sua época: tradução cultural. Após uma breve história da idéia de tradução cultural, que inclui uma discussão de suas vantagens e desvantagens, o artigo termina com um estudo de caso de tradução tanto metafórica como cultural do conceito ocidental de liberdade para o Japão após a restauração imperial de 1868.
Latin American populism is generally associated with the
developmental stage of import substitution industrialization; it is
thus widely presumed to have been eclipsed by the debt crisis of
the 1980s and the free market reforms of the neoliberal era.
However, the leadership of Alberto Fujimori in Peru suggests that
new forms of populism may be emerging despite the fiscal
constraints of neoliberal austerity. This new variant of populism
thrives in a context where economic crisis and social dislocation
undermine traditional representative institutions, enabling
personalist leaders to establish unmediated relationships with
heterogeneous, atomized masses. Political support can be
cultivated through populist attacks on entrenched political elites or
institutions, along with targeted but highly visible poverty alleviation
programs. This new form of populist autocracy complements the
efforts of neoliberal technocrats to circumvent the representative
institutions that are integral to democratic accountability. The
Peruvian case thus demonstrates that populism has been
transformed rather than eclipsed during the neoliberal era and that it
should be decoupled theoretically from any particular phase or
model of economic development.
‘Crisis’ is one of the most underdeveloped concepts in state theory and, indeed, in social and political theory more generally. In this article I suggest one way in which this persistent oversight might be rectified, making a distinctive case for rethinking the process of social and political change in terms of the transformation of the state, and for rethinking state crisis in this ‘restating of social and political change’ (see also Hay 1996a). I return to the etymology of the term and (re-)conceptualise ‘crisis’ as a moment of decisive intervention and not merely a moment of fragmentation, dislocation or destruction. This reformulation suggests the need to give far greater emphasis to the essential narrativity of crisis, and the relationship between discourses of crisis and the contradictions that they narrate. The result is an analysis of crisis as a moment of transformation—a moment in which it is recognised that a decisive intervention can, and indeed must, be made. It is argued that during such moments of crisis a new trajectory is imposed upon the state. The intense and condensed temporality of crisis thus emerges as a strategic moment in the structural transformation of the state. Within this theoretical account crises are thus revealed as ‘epoch-making’ moments marking the transition between phases of historical–political time. They are thus suggestive of a periodisation of the development of the state.
As Europe enters a significant phase of re-integration of East and West, it faces an increasing problem with the rise of far-right political parties. Cas Mudde offers the first comprehensive and truly pan-European study of populist radical right parties in Europe. He focuses on the parties themselves, discussing them both as dependent and independent variables. Based upon a wealth of primary and secondary literature, this book offers critical and original insights into three major aspects of European populist radical right parties: concepts and classifications; themes and issues; and explanations for electoral failures and successes. It concludes with a discussion of the impact of radical right parties on European democracies, and vice versa, and offers suggestions for future research.
First published in 1967, Writing and Difference, a collection of Jacques Derrida's essays written between 1959 and 1966, has become a landmark of contemporary French thought. In it we find Derrida at work on his systematic deconstruction of Western metaphysics. The book's first half, which includes the celebrated essay on Descartes and Foucault, shows the development of Derrida's method of deconstruction. In these essays, Derrida demonstrates the traditional nature of some purportedly nontraditional currents of modern thoughtâone of his main targets being the way in which "structuralism" unwittingly repeats metaphysical concepts in its use of linguistic models. The second half of the book contains some of Derrida's most compelling analyses of why and how metaphysical thinking must exclude writing from its conception of language, finally showing metaphysics to be constituted by this exclusion. These essays on Artaud, Freud, Bataille, Hegel, and Lévi-Strauss have served as introductions to Derrida's notions of writing and différenceâthe untranslatable formulation of a nonmetaphysical "concept" that does not exclude writingâfor almost a generation of students of literature, philosophy, and psychoanalysis. Writing and Difference reveals the unacknowledged program that makes thought itself possible. In analyzing the contradictions inherent in this program, Derrida foes on to develop new ways of thinking, reading, and writing,ânew ways based on the most complete and rigorous understanding of the old ways. Scholars and students from all disciplines will find Writing and Difference an excellent introduction to perhaps the most challenging of contemporary French thinkersâchallenging because Derrida questions thought as we know it.
Beyond Flaunting of the 'Low': Populism as a Transgressive Style
- Théo Aiolfi
Aiolfi, Théo. 2021. "Beyond Flaunting of the 'Low': Populism as a Transgressive Style".
Conference paper presented at the 62 nd Annual Convention of the International Studies
Association.
Populism as Synecdochal Representation: Understanding the Transgressive Bodily Performances of South American Presidents
- María Casullo
- Esperanza
Casullo, María Esperanza. 2021. "Populism as Synecdochal Representation: Understanding
the Transgressive Bodily Performances of South American Presidents". In Populism in Global
Perspective: A Performative and Discursive Approach, edited by Pierre Ostiguy, Francisco
Panizza & Benjamin Moffitt, 47-72. New York: Routledge.
The Empire Bites Back: Literary Cannibalism and Environmental Crisis in the Américas
- Giulia Champion
Champion, Giulia. 2022 (Forthcoming). The Empire Bites Back: Literary Cannibalism and
Environmental Crisis in the Américas. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
The Body in Populism
- Paula Diehl
Diehl, Paula. 2017. "The Body in Populism". In Political Populism: A Handbook, edited by
Reinhard Heinisch, Christina Holtzbacha, and Oscar. Mazzoleni, 361-372. Baden Baden:
Nomos.
- Ernesto Laclau
Laclau, Ernesto. 2005. On Populist Reason. London: Verso.
- Cas Mudde
Mudde, Cas. 2004. "The Populist Zeitgeist". Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541-563.
What is Populism? Philadelphia
- Jan-Werner Müller
Müller, Jan-Werner. 2016. What is Populism? Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Modernization Dreams, Lusotropical Promises: A Global Studies Perspective on Brazil-Mozambique Development Discourse
- Hannah Pitkin
Pitkin, Hannah. 1972. The Concept of Representation. London: University of California Press
Ribeiro, Ana Beatriz. 2020. "Modernization Dreams, Lusotropical Promises: A Global Studies
Perspective on Brazil-Mozambique Development Discourse". Hypotheses -TRAFO Blog for
Transregional Research. https://trafo.hypotheses.org/25903 (last accessed 03/05/21).
From Working Mothers to Housewives: Gender and Brazilian Populism from Getúlio Vargas to Juscelino Kubitschek
- Joel Wolfe
Wolfe, Joel. 2010. "From Working Mothers to Housewives: Gender and Brazilian Populism
from Getúlio Vargas to Juscelino Kubitschek", in Latin America: Passionate Politics, edited
by Karen. Kampwirth, 91-109. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University Press.
News broadcasts
'Coronavírus: "país de Maricas" e Outras 8 Frases de Bolsonaro Sobre Pandemia Que Matou
Brasil Tem de Deixar de Ser "país de Maricas" e Enfrentar Pandemia "de Peito Aberto
- Pedro Gomes
- Henrique
Gomes, Pedro Henrique, 'Brasil Tem de Deixar de Ser "país de Maricas" e Enfrentar Pandemia
"de
Peito
Aberto",
Diz
Bolsonaro',
Globo.Com,
2020