A ascensão do neoconservadorismo na política brasileira e as repercussões na democracia: uma análise comparativa dos discursos de Bolsonaro e do líder da Igreja Universal do Reino de Deus

Abstract

The present work has as its central focus the analysis of the speeches of Bishop Edir Macedo, leader of the Universal Church of the Kingdom of God, and the ex-president of the Republic Jair Messias Bolsonaro. The IURD is the largest representative of the neo-Pentecostal segment in Brazil; when inserted into party politics, assumes a neoconservative and neoliberal stance, guidelines that Bolsonaro developed throughout his political career. The objective of such analysis is to identify elements that, according to Umberto Eco characterization, are characteristic of fascism. To understand the current context in which religion and party politics strengthen relations in favor of common agendas, the theoretical framework will describe the origins of neoconservatism and neo-Pentecostalism in Brazil. The definitions of contemporary fascism (neofascism) and democracy will also be addressed, in order to reflect on the repercussions of the rise of neoconservatism and neofascism on Brazilian democracy and the formulation of public policies. The data processing of this research occurred in a qualitative way, as the data collected through bibliographical research were analyzed, compared and the study was concluded through the interpretation of the information obtained, with the purpose of examining the effects of the rise of neo-fascist groups on Brazilian democracy and indicate alternatives to strengthen it. The interpretation of authorship permeates the entire study, with hermeneutics being the center of cognitive actions.Through the analysis of discourses, it is evident that in both the characteristics listed by Eco are present: in Macedo the basic elements of the fascist ideology, its conceptual bases, are more evident, and in Bolsonaro the operational part of this ideology, its more feasible and empirical dimension, is more frequently verified. The direct influence of religion in the State is responsible for further polarizing society, dividing it into groups and making it difficult to find points of consensus for the sake of a common good. Such a rise of neoconservatism and neofascism in politics compromises the secularity of the State and the search for the common good, jeopardizing the progress of decades of struggle for visibility and the creation of laws and public policies for minorities historically excluded from state decisions.