“De onde? Para onde?” the continuity question and the debate over Brazil’s “Civil”-military dictatorship

Abstract

This article deals with the disputed terminology used to refer to the Brazilian military regime (1964–1985). On one side is the traditional “military dictatorship” nomenclature, which places the armed forces at the center of the political system during the period in question. Conversely, the more recent “civil-military dictatorship” terminology notes that the regime depended on civilian allies in business and government, as well as popular support, throughout its existence. My entry point is a heated 2012 debate between journalist Pedro Pomar and the radical art collective Coletivo Zagaia. I explore how new social actors that emerged after redemocratization have become central to the struggle over human rights in Brazil and, more specifically, how the dictatorship is remembered in the present. This debate among scholars, activists, bloggers, and journalists is fundamentally about memory, accountability, and, I argue, the quality of Brazilian democracy today.