The pedagogy of servitude
Roberto Romano states that the STF, when justifying its vote in favor of the measures
of rationing, gave the people a certificate of minority

“The right of the people
to govern oneself
it is a challenge against all truth.
The truth is that people have
the right to be governed”
(Getulio Vargas)

MANUEL ALVES FILHO

he discussions surrounding the Brazilian energy crisis gained a new and important twist after the Federal Supreme Court (STF) considered the measures adopted by the government to address the problem constitutional. When justifying the decision, the STF ministers used a strictly political argument. According to them, the population would not meet electricity saving targets if the determinations were declared unconstitutional. For philosopher Roberto Romano, professor at the Institute of Philosophy and Human Sciences (IFCH) at Unicamp, such a position is unacceptable from a democratic point of view. “This stance reinforces the concept of the pedagogy of servitude. The judges gave the Brazilian people a certificate of minority, of unpatriotism, of lack of responsible behavior”, says the intellectual.

According to Roberto Romano, the STF's judgment would be acceptable, as long as it was based on another assumption. The professor states that the Judiciary could have highlighted in its arguments the state of emergency in which the country finds itself and the consequent public risk, a resource provided for in administrative law. “If such an attitude were taken, followed by a call from the judges to the people, for everyone to help overcome the difficulties arising from reckless management, the STF would deserve applause”, he analyzes.

Instead, says the philosopher, the members of the highest court of the Judiciary preferred to disrespect citizenship. “The Supreme Court’s decision exemplifies all the anti-liberal and anti-democracy doctrines that have been rearticulated since the 18th century, as a reaction to the legal and political achievements embodied in the American and French revolutions”, he compares. For romantic indoctrinators and supporters of conservatism, explains the Unicamp professor, the people are simply a large mass of irresponsible children, who must be protected by those in power.

With a sentence that is intended to be prudent, the STF, reinforces Roberto Romano, “gives another blow to the stake that holds the Brazilian republic in its conservative and anti-liberal past”. The Brazilian State, he adds, presents very serious fractures due to the archaism of its functions and the doctrines that govern it. Parliamentary representation, recalls the professor, is numerically flawed and is in eternal crisis due to corruption scandals and programmatic infidelity. Politicians, he claims, change parties at their convenience, violating the commitment made to their voters.

In this same scenario, continues the philosopher, the Executive invests itself, with the complicity of parliamentary leaders, with legislative force. The Judiciary, in turn, does not actually judge the acts of other powers. “The STF’s decision on the energy crisis forces a definitive rupture between citizens and the State that should represent them. As a result, public faith is shaken to its roots, preventing democratic coexistence both on a horizontal plane (from citizen to citizen) and vertically (from citizens to administrators)”.

Roberto Romano goes further in his analysis and draws attention to the future risk posed by this type of stance. If this path becomes more radical, he warns, there will be difficulties in guaranteeing the pact that allows the existence of a safe society, in a democratic state governed by the rule of law. “The urban violence that devastates us is an indication of what can happen in a land where the Constitution does not meet the demands of citizens, being used only in favor of those in power”, he explains.

Autonomy – The current Brazilian Constitution, highlights Roberto Romano, has a significant difference in relation to the previous ones: the doctrine of autonomy, which, ultimately, represents its very essence. This is what the Unicamp professor calls citizen autonomy, a principle that governs the activities of states, the Public Ministry, universities and society in relation to public administration. This core of the Magna Carta, according to the intellectual, was strongly affected by the position of the STF, which imposed a surcharge on taxpayers and possible cuts in the supply of electricity. “The way of affirming the irresponsibility of each and every citizen constitutes a blow against the spirit of autonomy”.

Romano turns to Imanuel Kant, the thinker of autonomy, to remember that freedom only exists when the law is universal, when it is respected for its own sake. If imposed through fear and punishment, legislation tends to be received by society as something emanating from a will outside its own. According to the philosopher, this is called heteronomy of will. A heteronomous individual, he emphasizes, will never be free. “Assuming the thesis of punishment imposed by the federal Executive, the STF judges made it worse. They proclaimed that the Brazilian people only respect the law if there are punishments on the horizon. From Kant’s perspective, this is despotic effectiveness.”

Previous – The STF’s position on the energy crisis cannot be analyzed outside of a historical perspective. The Brazilian State, according to the professor, has its origins in the counter-revolution that followed the democratic policies implemented in several nations after the French and American revolutions. Dom João VI, when fleeing from Napoleon, brought to Brazil a State project that prevented the possibility of events like that of 1789. Even before independence, but especially after it, the country became an effective moderator of democratic and liberals, both at home and abroad.

The technique used to mitigate the power of the people was the institution of the Moderating Power, concentrated in the figure of the head of state. The proclamation of the Republic, says the philosopher, did not abolish this instrument. The president continued to exercise pre-eminence over the other powers. The practice was reinforced with the Old Republic, which had very strong traits of positivism and its dictatorship thesis. The dictatorial period Vargas – trained in the positivist school of Rio Grande do Sul – increased the president's power to the detriment of other sectors of the State. All these actions, explains the Unicamp professor, were carried out to mitigate democratic and popular sovereignty theses as much as possible.