Abstract
This article presents the first results of research on the organization and administration of the Brazilian presidency and problems of democratic governance in Brazil. Biases of Euro-centrism in current views of presidentialism, democracy, governance, and representation are criticized and new comparative analysis of political experiences in the Americas called for. Initial analysis of the Brazilian presidency reveals a unique combination of executive-led electoral representation and muddling through governance since the transition from military rule.
Highlights
The collapse of the Soviet Union culminated a remarkable series of transitions from military, authoritarian, and Stalinist rule
While a rich diversity of scholarship on democratic transitions and their legacies exists,1 this paper argues that political scientists need to more carefully consider new developments in the global south and east, and that the Brazilian experience is uniquely suited to provide new concepts and theories about democracy and governance
New work is needed because existing theories and concepts about presidentialism (Linz & Valenzuela, 1994; Mettenheim, 1997), democracy,2 governance,3 and economic policy4 tend to underestimate the importance of new patterns of change in Brazil and other post-transition contexts
Summary
The collapse of the Soviet Union culminated a remarkable series of transitions from military, authoritarian, and Stalinist rule. Three aspects of American party development provide a fundamentally new perspective on partyelectoral politics in Brazil: (1) the importance of direct popular appeals and populism in presidential systems; (2) the capacity of presidents and other executives to directly nominate partisans to administrative posts, and; (3) the autonomy of local and regional patronage machines under federalism Can this trajectory of change be called democratization? BASIC CONSUMER BASKET AND THE MINIMUM WAGE state-led representation in post-transition Brazil differ significantly from existing theories in comparative politics and economics Contrary to those seeking broad constitutional reform or economic policy-packages (whether neo-liberal or heterodox), and contrary to zero-sum conceptions that set democratization against sound economic policy, recent successes have been based on muddling through. Conceptual innovation is urgently needed to avert the Euro-centrism and liberal-reformism that often bias analysis. Recent calls for the adoption of parliamentary government or the reform of party and electoral politics echo earlier initiatives of political
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
