Nivalter Aires
Doutor pelo Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências Sociais - UFRN (2021), Mestre pelo Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciências Sociais - UFCG (2017), Bacharel em Ciências Econômicas - UFCG (2013) e Licenciado em Ciências Sociais - FAEP (2019).
less
InterestsView All (18)
Uploads
Papers
With this article, we aim to shed light on some elements of the critique of political economy as a method that favor the development of research in the field of human and social sciences. For this, we start from the writings produced by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels – which we complement with the theoretical advances produced by some Marxist intellectuals over the last century and a half – in an effort to highlight important principles for investigation. We emphasize, as relevant aspects of the work, that social research must be based on the concrete reality, and it is up to the researcher to discover the mediation between appearance and essence through successive approximations of reconstruction, in thought, of the totality of the analyzed phenomenon, from their own movement, in view of social transformation.
ABSTRACT. Since the 1990s, the thesis that the Northeast is an invention-an imagery-discursive production-has gained prominence. This theory was elaborated by the historian Durval Muniz and is presented in his book "A Invenção do Nordeste e outras artes". From a Foucaultian historiographical construction, he proposes that some political-cultural movements created the Northeast region. Therefore, our objective is to produce a radical critique of this thesis. We use the theoretical-methodological approach of materialism and the dialectic in historical analysis, proposing "criticism" as a method of apprehending knowledge of a political and social nature. For this we consulted a large bibliographical collection, contemplating, besides Durval Muniz, his interlocutors, namely: Gilberto Freyre and the novelists of the generation of 30. As results we present that there are weaknesses in the analysis of Durval Muniz, which tend to the homogenization of the regional space; and disregards important approaches to the Northeast Question, especially on the issue of development. 1. Introdução O Brasil, enquanto um país de dimensões continentais, abriga uma profunda questão regional que no nível da aparência (aquilo que está às vistas) se apresenta através da pobreza da região Nordeste em contraste com a riqueza do Centro-sul. Com a finalidade de explicar este fenômeno muito se escreveu e se propôs desde princípios do século XX, e, dessa forma, a "pobreza" nordestina tem sido atribuída a diversas causas.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is analyze new developmentalism in Brazil, at the beginning of the 21st century, from the debate within contemporary Marxism, considering in our cut two different analyzes, the proposition of Armando Boito Jr. on the one hand, and, on the other hand, that of Plínio de Arruda Sampaio Jr. and Rodrigo Castelo. As parameters, to make this comparison possible, we use the following themes: population participation; the developmentalism; new developmentalism and its contradictions; and, finally, the crisis of new developmentalism. The different readings point to different political conclusions, in the face of the crisis of new developmentalism, Boito Jr. proposes the articulation of the struggle of the popular classes in agreement with bourgeois sectors; Plínio Jr. proposes independence from the subaltern classes, pointing to a democratic rupture with the pattern of liberalperipheral accumulation by the working classes. As a conclusion we agree with Plínio Jr. and Castelo, in a critical posture to new developmentalism, and a proposal of independent struggle of the popular layers in the face of the crisis.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is to take stock of the thought of Celso Furtado on the problems of the Brazilian Northeast region and the issue of development, from his writings between 1959 and 2004. The methodology used is dialectical and historical materialism, considering Brazil as a country subject to the problems of semicolonial or dependent capitalism; we also consider the studies of Bakhtin, in Marxismo e Filosofia da Linguagem, who understands that each epoch and each social group have their repertoire and form of discourse in the ideological partner communication, as well as Celso Furtado and the whole discussion on development, which gives a leading role and centrality to the industrial fraction of capital. As a result it is observed that: Furtado defends the development for the Northeast, via SUDENE, in 1959-1964; that the military coup of 1964 barred these aspirations; that the 21 years of military rule were marked by a "poor development"; and after the re-democratization of neo-liberal policies, produced particularly harmful effects in the more dependent regions of the federal government.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper to propose an interpretation of the northeast question in Brazil, from the intellectual production of Antonio Gramsci on the southern question. Without pretending to explain the complex dynamics of current capitalism, but rather to understand historically the formation of a northeast question. For this, we will use the concepts of Historical Block, Passive Revolution, the role of the Intellectuals, and the importance of the Workers-Peasants alliance for the emancipation of the subaltern classes. As a result, it is possible to observe the validity of this interpretation for the understanding of the contradictions present in the Northeast region, since the formation of the Brazilian State, and especially at the height of the process of “Ligas Camponesas” struggles, creation of SUDENE between the 1950s and 1960s, and the stoppage of this process of struggles with the 1964 Coup.
Talks
Thesis Chapters
Abstract: The thesis we seek to defend is that the uneven and combined development of capitalism, in the context of the Brazilian socioeconomic formations, produced a regional issue, conditioning the Brazilian Northeast to a subaltern position. We aim to understand the relationship of the Brazilian State with the Northeastern question, across governments from the 1930s to 2018, with the objective of interrelating the State's intervention with the northeastern issue and class struggles, relating the policies to the moment when they were proposed and to the factions of the bourgeoisie that held the hegemony within the scope of the historical bloc. All of this, aiming to understand the reason for the failure of a deep and progressive transformation of the Northeastern reality during this period. To do this, we propose an investigation based on the movement inherent to the object researched – the Northeastern issue –, submitting to criticism the discourse that were produced about this subject, understanding that they are part of a concrete and dynamic totality. We use, as the main research technique, a bibliographic review on the diverse elements that are related to the theme of the State, the uneven development and the regional issue in the different periods, using the theoretical framework to understand the historical movement. In addition to the bibliographic analysis, we propose a documentary investigation of the various policies produced by the Brazilian State, which aimed to direct intervention in the Northeast. It became clear, through investigation, that the Northeastern issue remains irresolute, even though it has changed – because of the changes that the national and Northeastern economies are undergoing, starting with the processes of commercial integration (after 1930s) and later productive (after 1950s), followed by a productive disintegration (after 1990s) – in which the Northeast never left its subaltern position. The dependence of this region is manifested, precisely, in the moments of greater economic, social, political and climatic turbulence, constraining the Brazilian State to intervene in several ways, through the creation of institutions in the decades – DNOCS, BNB, SUDENE, ADENE, etc. – without ever being able to create the conditions to overcome the economic distance between this region and the Center-South. In view of this more general movement – between developmentalism vs. (neo)liberalism – we understand that the search for overcoming the Northeastern backwardness has as a barrier the limits of dependent capitalism of the Brazilian socioeconomic formations, expressed in the mentality of the bourgeoisie. In view of this, we reaffirm that the various experiences of intervention and systematic abandonment clearly demonstrated the impossibility of the bourgeois State's action to give an effective answer to this issue.
Resumen: La tesis que buscamos defender es: el desarrollo desigual y combinado del capitalismo, en la formación económico-social brasileña, produjo una cuestión regional, condicionando al Nordeste brasileño a una posición subordinada. Nuestro objetivo es comprender la relación del Estado brasileño con la Cuestión del Nordeste, en los gobiernos desde los '30 hasta 2018, con el objetivo de interrelacionar la intervención del Estado con el problema del Nordeste y las luchas de clases, con las políticas y el momento en que fueron propuestas y con la facción burguesa que ostentaba la hegemonía en el ámbito del bloque histórico. Esto, con la intención de comprender el motivo del fracaso de una transformación profunda y progresiva de la realidad del Nordeste durante este período. Para llevar a cabo tal emprendimiento, proponemos una investigación basada en el movimiento inherente al objeto investigado – la cuestión del Nordeste –, sometiendo a crítica el conjunto de discursos que se produjeron sobre este tema, entendiendo que son parte de una totalidad concreta y dinámica, que posee apariencia y esencia. Proponemos, como principal técnica de investigación, una revisión bibliográfica sobre los diversos elementos que se relacionan con la temática del Estado, el desarrollo desigual y la cuestión regional en los diferentes períodos, utilizando el marco teórico para comprender el movimiento histórico. Además del análisis bibliográfico, proponemos una investigación documental de las diversas políticas producidas por el Estado brasileño, que apuntaron a la intervención directa en el Nordeste. Quedó claro, a través de la investigación, que la cuestión del Nordeste permanece sin resolver, aunque se ha transformado, debido a los cambios que están experimentando las economías nacional y del Nordeste, desde los procesos de integración comercial (después de los ‘30) y productiva (después de los ‘50), y una desintegración productiva (después de los ‘90), en que el Nordeste nunca abandonó su posición subordinada. La dependencia de esta región se manifiesta, precisamente, en los momentos de mayor turbulencia económica, social, política y climática, obligando al Estado brasileño a intervenir de diversas formas, particularmente a través de la creación de instituciones – DNOCS, BNB, SUDENE, ADENE, etc. –, pero sin poder nunca crear las condiciones para superar la distancia económica entre esta región y el Centro-Sur. En vista de este movimiento más general, entre “desarrollismo vs. (neo) liberalismo”, entendemos que la búsqueda por la superación del atraso del Nordeste tiene como barrera los límites del capitalismo dependiente, expresado en la mentalidad de la burguesía periférica, de la formación económico-social brasileña. Ante esto, reafirmamos que las diversas experiencias de intervención y abandono sistemático demostraron claramente la imposibilidad de la acción del Estado burgués para dar una respuesta efectiva a esta cuestión.
With this article, we aim to shed light on some elements of the critique of political economy as a method that favor the development of research in the field of human and social sciences. For this, we start from the writings produced by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels – which we complement with the theoretical advances produced by some Marxist intellectuals over the last century and a half – in an effort to highlight important principles for investigation. We emphasize, as relevant aspects of the work, that social research must be based on the concrete reality, and it is up to the researcher to discover the mediation between appearance and essence through successive approximations of reconstruction, in thought, of the totality of the analyzed phenomenon, from their own movement, in view of social transformation.
ABSTRACT. Since the 1990s, the thesis that the Northeast is an invention-an imagery-discursive production-has gained prominence. This theory was elaborated by the historian Durval Muniz and is presented in his book "A Invenção do Nordeste e outras artes". From a Foucaultian historiographical construction, he proposes that some political-cultural movements created the Northeast region. Therefore, our objective is to produce a radical critique of this thesis. We use the theoretical-methodological approach of materialism and the dialectic in historical analysis, proposing "criticism" as a method of apprehending knowledge of a political and social nature. For this we consulted a large bibliographical collection, contemplating, besides Durval Muniz, his interlocutors, namely: Gilberto Freyre and the novelists of the generation of 30. As results we present that there are weaknesses in the analysis of Durval Muniz, which tend to the homogenization of the regional space; and disregards important approaches to the Northeast Question, especially on the issue of development. 1. Introdução O Brasil, enquanto um país de dimensões continentais, abriga uma profunda questão regional que no nível da aparência (aquilo que está às vistas) se apresenta através da pobreza da região Nordeste em contraste com a riqueza do Centro-sul. Com a finalidade de explicar este fenômeno muito se escreveu e se propôs desde princípios do século XX, e, dessa forma, a "pobreza" nordestina tem sido atribuída a diversas causas.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is analyze new developmentalism in Brazil, at the beginning of the 21st century, from the debate within contemporary Marxism, considering in our cut two different analyzes, the proposition of Armando Boito Jr. on the one hand, and, on the other hand, that of Plínio de Arruda Sampaio Jr. and Rodrigo Castelo. As parameters, to make this comparison possible, we use the following themes: population participation; the developmentalism; new developmentalism and its contradictions; and, finally, the crisis of new developmentalism. The different readings point to different political conclusions, in the face of the crisis of new developmentalism, Boito Jr. proposes the articulation of the struggle of the popular classes in agreement with bourgeois sectors; Plínio Jr. proposes independence from the subaltern classes, pointing to a democratic rupture with the pattern of liberalperipheral accumulation by the working classes. As a conclusion we agree with Plínio Jr. and Castelo, in a critical posture to new developmentalism, and a proposal of independent struggle of the popular layers in the face of the crisis.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is to take stock of the thought of Celso Furtado on the problems of the Brazilian Northeast region and the issue of development, from his writings between 1959 and 2004. The methodology used is dialectical and historical materialism, considering Brazil as a country subject to the problems of semicolonial or dependent capitalism; we also consider the studies of Bakhtin, in Marxismo e Filosofia da Linguagem, who understands that each epoch and each social group have their repertoire and form of discourse in the ideological partner communication, as well as Celso Furtado and the whole discussion on development, which gives a leading role and centrality to the industrial fraction of capital. As a result it is observed that: Furtado defends the development for the Northeast, via SUDENE, in 1959-1964; that the military coup of 1964 barred these aspirations; that the 21 years of military rule were marked by a "poor development"; and after the re-democratization of neo-liberal policies, produced particularly harmful effects in the more dependent regions of the federal government.
ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper to propose an interpretation of the northeast question in Brazil, from the intellectual production of Antonio Gramsci on the southern question. Without pretending to explain the complex dynamics of current capitalism, but rather to understand historically the formation of a northeast question. For this, we will use the concepts of Historical Block, Passive Revolution, the role of the Intellectuals, and the importance of the Workers-Peasants alliance for the emancipation of the subaltern classes. As a result, it is possible to observe the validity of this interpretation for the understanding of the contradictions present in the Northeast region, since the formation of the Brazilian State, and especially at the height of the process of “Ligas Camponesas” struggles, creation of SUDENE between the 1950s and 1960s, and the stoppage of this process of struggles with the 1964 Coup.
Abstract: The thesis we seek to defend is that the uneven and combined development of capitalism, in the context of the Brazilian socioeconomic formations, produced a regional issue, conditioning the Brazilian Northeast to a subaltern position. We aim to understand the relationship of the Brazilian State with the Northeastern question, across governments from the 1930s to 2018, with the objective of interrelating the State's intervention with the northeastern issue and class struggles, relating the policies to the moment when they were proposed and to the factions of the bourgeoisie that held the hegemony within the scope of the historical bloc. All of this, aiming to understand the reason for the failure of a deep and progressive transformation of the Northeastern reality during this period. To do this, we propose an investigation based on the movement inherent to the object researched – the Northeastern issue –, submitting to criticism the discourse that were produced about this subject, understanding that they are part of a concrete and dynamic totality. We use, as the main research technique, a bibliographic review on the diverse elements that are related to the theme of the State, the uneven development and the regional issue in the different periods, using the theoretical framework to understand the historical movement. In addition to the bibliographic analysis, we propose a documentary investigation of the various policies produced by the Brazilian State, which aimed to direct intervention in the Northeast. It became clear, through investigation, that the Northeastern issue remains irresolute, even though it has changed – because of the changes that the national and Northeastern economies are undergoing, starting with the processes of commercial integration (after 1930s) and later productive (after 1950s), followed by a productive disintegration (after 1990s) – in which the Northeast never left its subaltern position. The dependence of this region is manifested, precisely, in the moments of greater economic, social, political and climatic turbulence, constraining the Brazilian State to intervene in several ways, through the creation of institutions in the decades – DNOCS, BNB, SUDENE, ADENE, etc. – without ever being able to create the conditions to overcome the economic distance between this region and the Center-South. In view of this more general movement – between developmentalism vs. (neo)liberalism – we understand that the search for overcoming the Northeastern backwardness has as a barrier the limits of dependent capitalism of the Brazilian socioeconomic formations, expressed in the mentality of the bourgeoisie. In view of this, we reaffirm that the various experiences of intervention and systematic abandonment clearly demonstrated the impossibility of the bourgeois State's action to give an effective answer to this issue.
Resumen: La tesis que buscamos defender es: el desarrollo desigual y combinado del capitalismo, en la formación económico-social brasileña, produjo una cuestión regional, condicionando al Nordeste brasileño a una posición subordinada. Nuestro objetivo es comprender la relación del Estado brasileño con la Cuestión del Nordeste, en los gobiernos desde los '30 hasta 2018, con el objetivo de interrelacionar la intervención del Estado con el problema del Nordeste y las luchas de clases, con las políticas y el momento en que fueron propuestas y con la facción burguesa que ostentaba la hegemonía en el ámbito del bloque histórico. Esto, con la intención de comprender el motivo del fracaso de una transformación profunda y progresiva de la realidad del Nordeste durante este período. Para llevar a cabo tal emprendimiento, proponemos una investigación basada en el movimiento inherente al objeto investigado – la cuestión del Nordeste –, sometiendo a crítica el conjunto de discursos que se produjeron sobre este tema, entendiendo que son parte de una totalidad concreta y dinámica, que posee apariencia y esencia. Proponemos, como principal técnica de investigación, una revisión bibliográfica sobre los diversos elementos que se relacionan con la temática del Estado, el desarrollo desigual y la cuestión regional en los diferentes períodos, utilizando el marco teórico para comprender el movimiento histórico. Además del análisis bibliográfico, proponemos una investigación documental de las diversas políticas producidas por el Estado brasileño, que apuntaron a la intervención directa en el Nordeste. Quedó claro, a través de la investigación, que la cuestión del Nordeste permanece sin resolver, aunque se ha transformado, debido a los cambios que están experimentando las economías nacional y del Nordeste, desde los procesos de integración comercial (después de los ‘30) y productiva (después de los ‘50), y una desintegración productiva (después de los ‘90), en que el Nordeste nunca abandonó su posición subordinada. La dependencia de esta región se manifiesta, precisamente, en los momentos de mayor turbulencia económica, social, política y climática, obligando al Estado brasileño a intervenir de diversas formas, particularmente a través de la creación de instituciones – DNOCS, BNB, SUDENE, ADENE, etc. –, pero sin poder nunca crear las condiciones para superar la distancia económica entre esta región y el Centro-Sur. En vista de este movimiento más general, entre “desarrollismo vs. (neo) liberalismo”, entendemos que la búsqueda por la superación del atraso del Nordeste tiene como barrera los límites del capitalismo dependiente, expresado en la mentalidad de la burguesía periférica, de la formación económico-social brasileña. Ante esto, reafirmamos que las diversas experiencias de intervención y abandono sistemático demostraron claramente la imposibilidad de la acción del Estado burgués para dar una respuesta efectiva a esta cuestión.