Francisco Weffort Death – Obituary | Prof. Dr. Francisco Weffort Has Died

Francisco Weffort By Rudá Ricci The other day, I received an invitation from the Latin American Episcopal Council (CELLAM) and the Advanced Social Research Centre (CISAV) to talk about the risks of the rise of populations (plural) on our continent. Immediately thought of Weffort and Laclau After all, they are two compulsory intellectuals in the formulation of Latin American populations. Reread the mandatory ′′ Populism in Brazilian Politics ′′ published by Weffort in 1978, composed of texts written between 1963 and 1971. And I was once again surprised by its originality and double engagement: political and sociological. It was the academic vein of leftist sociologists (mostly Paulistas and Cariocas) forged during the military regime transiting over the two poles Max Weber suggested to operate in distinct circuits. The concept of populism is employed from an extremely broad theoretical and political spectrum, which generates some technical inaccuracy. A thorny theme, therefore. From the experience of the People’s Party (USA and Russia) to clientelist practices articulated by charismatic leaders throughout the accelerated urbanization process in Latin America, coming to use – and abuse – by the ultraliberal strands from the end of the th century that sustain spending socials considered excessive would cause populist tax imbalance.

Francis Weffort’s reading was quirky and ventured through this seara. It sustained that populism in Latin America emerged with the emergence of popular masses in politics, when universal suffrage and accelerated urbanization in the mid-th century. For him, populist practice is a sort of transformism, a Gramscian term that symbolizes an anticipation of political elites to social and economic changes demanded by the urban masses to maintain political order. Weffort quotes a famous slogan of Brazilian Senator Antonio Carlos who, in the 1930 s, would have said: ′′ Let’s make the revolution before the people do it “. In that period, popular interests – and vote – would have entered the political game and were operated by middle class urban leadership from strong clientelism with public resources and state apparatus their basic manipulation structure.

In an article critical of Weffort’s essays on populism, Daniela Mussi and André Kaysel Velasco and Cruz recall that the author was influenced by the period when USP (1963 s and 1968 s) gave way to many studies that refuted nationalism that fueled getulist labor and Soviet communism. Between 1963 and 1964, remember Mussi and Velasco and Cruz, participated in a project of the Centre for Industrial Studies and the work (Cesit), coordinated by Gabriel Cohn (and founded by Forestan Fernandes), where Weffort contributed the chapter ′′ Politics and masses “, in which he critically analysed the ambitions and impasses of nationalist politics in the Brazilian context. It was when he also wrote the first conclusions of the empirical research that led to the ′′ roots of populism ′′ in the municipal elections in São Paulo. During this period, Weffort already commented on the character of ′′ ghost partner ′′ of popular masses participation in Brazilian politics after 1930, disputed right and left and being subject to ′′ basic reforms “. Since then, the sociologist who presided over the Centre for Contemporary Culture Studies (CEDEC) has developed an accurate sense to understand how much Brazilian institutionalized policy fed and encouraged passive citizenship of popular masses. Term developed by Maria Victoria Benevides, passive citizenship was that restricted to voting, without any other participation in the public decision-making process. Not for any other reason, Francisco Weffort was an enthusiast for the Foundation of the Worker s’ Party and was always concerned about political culture – a very expensive term to Argentine sociology, but not so valued by these bands – Tupiniquim. I remember the discussions that Weffort led at CEDEC at the turn of the 1980 s to the 1990. s. He worried about popular disenchantment with Brazilian democracy and strived to understand which tortuous path we would still have to go. In ′′ What Democracy?”, a book published in the early 1990 s by the Society of Letters, suggested that the end of the dictatorship might not have meant the beginning of democracy. Weffort feared that our democracy crawled fairly on the court of our economic life, which seemed in crisis, in franglin. The question that stayed was: how do you realize the virtuosity of democracy for those who don’t get jobs or can’t guarantee food for their family? Weffort perceived a tendency to ungovernability in Brazil. Since that time, Brazilian democracy has built itself amid crises, ′′ fertile food for social conflicts and violence of diverse nature “, Weffort said. Which democracy can germinate on an infertile ground like that? This question seems to keep resonating in this cold early August 2021. Weffort was an engaged sociologist. And restless. He accompanied the environment and persecuted it to seek to understand how this original dilemma of unfinished citizenship in our country settled or escalated.

He was a candidate for federal deputy and I even traveled with him to my hometown, Tupa, and his hometown, Quatá, far apart a few miles from each other. There, we get it, Weffort would contribute more as a leftist intellectual. His speech was extremely elliptic and reflective. I realized something like that when Forestan Fernandes was a candidate for constituent deputy. Like Weffort, Forestan didn’t seem to be able to play political. His lack of trachejo exasperated me when, inviting Forestan to submit his candidacy at the SEADE Foundation, began his presentation saying that he didn’t know the reasons for anyone to vote for him. Weffort didn’t come to so much, but his political charisma was much smaller than his sociological acuity. Even so, Weffort was responsible for the next generation of Paulist sociologists to engage in politics. His article in São Paulo’s Folha explaining the reasons for creating PT, a party absolutely distinct from others, according to the opinion expressed, and fundamental to the change in Brazil’s political paths was read by many young people who entered sociology courses …. Weffort engaged sociologists in reading classics, in pleasure to think Brazilian politics, in anti-dogmatic engagement. It reflected and almost tortured itself to think Brazil. Maybe it was the biggest riddle you tried to unravel.

A great sociologist. A great guy. After all, he was born in the Tupa metropolitan area. No one expected less from him.

I received with regret of the passing of political scientist Francisco Weffort last night.One of the main scientists of the area in Brazil, was founder of one of the nuclei of which I am part, and also the longest occupant of the position of Minister of Culture in our country, thus being the subject of study of the book I am writing.

My condolences to the family and colleagues by profession.