Do Balms, Ointments, and Teas Cure Cancer? – Folha de S. Paulo, February 21, 1977
by Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira
I am not among those who believe that the lives of nations are ultimately driven by economics, geopolitics, and related factors. The topics studied in these and other subjects undoubtedly shape the course of events. In general, however, they do not determine it. What is truly decisive in history is religious and philosophical convictions—even if these are sometimes expressed as the denial of any conviction whatsoever.
My belief is by no means the result of a bookish conception of history and life. Philosophical and religious doctrines drive human events not in proportion to the space they occupy in books but in proportion to the extent to which they live in the souls of peoples.
The most august example is the Roman Catholic Church. It guides nations to the extent that, responding to divine grace, they allow themselves to be taught, sanctified, and guided by it. If a Catholic people has a distorted idea of religion, they will not be guided by Religion and the Catholic Church as found in Scripture and in the documents of the Magisterium, but by the corruption within their own souls.
* * *
The reader should not think I am about to analyze the CNBB meeting in Itaici based on these considerations. My topic today is centrism.
I do not doubt that, if a Gallup poll were conducted in Brazil, a minority, albeit inhibited by propaganda and the environment, would have the courage to declare itself right-wing. Another minority, smaller but stimulated by propaganda, would loudly proclaim itself left-wing. And the vast majority, if asked whether they are centrist, would answer affirmatively.
Consequently, if we want to know where Brazil is heading at the moment, we need to ask what centrism is. Not centrism as it is in the books, but centrism as it is felt and conceptualized by the majority.
* * *
Let me describe it.
I believe that, before becoming a political, social, or economic doctrine, centrism is, for most people, a diffuse conception of the universe, especially of what we might call the “Brazilian universe.” Correlatively, our centrism is a psychological and temperamental state.
As I understand it, centrists hold that in Brazil, the immensity of our territory, its mild climate, and the generosity and gentleness of nature’s conduct mitigate the factors that have led so many other peoples to crises, revolutions, and wars. On the other hand, Brazilians’ peaceful and affectionate nature makes them averse to quarrels, intrigues, or dramas.
That is where their state of mind comes from. The average Brazilian prefers to “let things slide” and accept opinions or solutions that are not exactly their own, as long as they can reconcile divergent currents and smooth out rough edges and contours, in the great and gentle carefreeness of our general environment.
Within this conception, the authentic Brazilian centrist—I am not talking about counterfeits—in most cases is not a tenacious man of doctrine, stuck in one position and fighting as fiercely against the right and the left as the right and the left sometimes fight each other.
Except in specific areas, the spontaneous, genuine Brazilian centrist (I emphasize the adjectives) seeks to reconcile the right and the left. This compromise involves calibrating the degree of eclectic sympathies each centrist may harbor from afar toward the right or the left. It also consists of determining the amount of concession the centrist deems necessary to appease both sides.
The only exceptions to this general rule are causes that touch the deep fibers of the national spirit. First and foremost is the sense of the country’s sovereignty and dignity. Or the kindness so typical of the country, which adopts as its own all causes in which there are underprivileged people to defend: the abolition of slavery, for example.
* * *
What is the purpose of this description?
A harsh experience of failures and rejections persuaded the leaders of international communism that they could not drag such a centrist majority into their delusional doctrinal or practical excesses, if only because, perceptive as they are, Brazilians realize that if disadvantaged people among them need help, it will never come from the implementation of a communist regime. For that would immediately transform the country into a concentration camp for 110 million disadvantaged people. As for national sovereignty and dignity, never mind! Just look at Cuba or Africa, without even needing to look as far as Europe and Asia.
What means, then, can communists employ to win? Since they cannot dominate the centrists, the solution is to have them, step by step and inadvertently, move toward the regime they have repudiated.
How? Through a simple farce. Since the communists are on the extreme left, it is easy, by a principle of symmetry, to make the naive centrist believe that anticommunists should be classified as members of the extreme right. Then a noisy centrist campaign marginalizes both extremes. It is marked by an acidic, tumultuous, demanding, and aggressive centrism, nothing more than a “made in Russia” counterfeit of the sweet, affable, and kind Brazilian centrism.
Thus, the communists relegate all their genuine opponents to a corner and render them powerless. Then, to finish discrediting them in the public eye, they try to brand them as Nazis as a final blow.
Of course, the avowed communists are at the other extreme. Viewed as a bloc, they seem to live in a moral ghetto. But woe betide anyone who even lightly touches that ghetto. Voices skillfully placed in key positions within the centrist structure will fiercely defend it.
The centrist—and here I am referring to the traditional, authentic Brazilian centrist, not the counterfeit centrist—is led to see only two “non-extremist” currents clashing: capitalists and socialists.
Driven by their old habit of compromise, agreement, and “jeitinho” (street-smart resourcefulness, or the Brazilian way of getting things done), what does an authentic centrist instinctively do? They seek a middle ground that tempers dissent. Now, socialists are always advancing demands, while capitalists are in a state of morbid stagnation. This means that, with every clash between these currents, the centrist asks, for the sake of peace, that the capitalist give a little ground to socialism and that socialists roar a little less loudly.
However, after a brief pause, socialists will “forget” the concession and roar again. Capitalists will make new concessions, and Brazil will become a little more socialist.
The final result is a matter of time. Bit by bit, through successive requests from centrists, socialists will have completely transformed Brazil.
What would such a completely transformed Brazil be like? A Brazil in which private property and private initiative had been entirely absorbed by state capitalism? Obviously, it would be a communist Brazil.
This is the communists’ Machiavellian game.
In short, Brazilian centrists need to recognize that in the Brazil of old, so gentle, harmonious, tepid, and peaceful, a new factor has entered the picture. A cancer has formed and spread, and mere policies of small concessions or the balms, ointments, and teas of old cannot defeat it.
Being modern is not only about applauding the century’s dizzying progress but also about diagnosing and nipping in the bud the century’s equally dizzying dangers. Among these is communism, which demands not compromise but struggle. Christian struggle, to be sure. For this very reason, it is a perceptive, continuous, and lofty struggle, like that of the Crusaders.
This is the duty of authentic 20th-century centrists if they do not wish to perish.
* * *
Summary
The average Brazilian is a centrist by temperament, a psychological state rooted in their mild, peaceful, and affectionate nature.
However, spontaneous and genuine Brazilian centrism differs fundamentally from “Moscow-made” centrism.
Which maneuver are they employing to lead Brazil to communism inadvertently?
Do you, reader, consider yourself a centrist? What is the duty of authentic centrists?
